Re: was -> wasn't Re: [VirtualBox] Use systemd-detect-virt to detect if we can install

On Tuesday, 29 November 2016 at 22:39, Sérgio Basto wrote: > > On Ter, 2016-11-29 at 22:16 +0100, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski > wrote: > > > > On Tuesday, 29 November 2016 at 19:46, Sérgio Basto wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Ter, 2016-11-29 at 14:17 +0100, Dominik 'Rathann' > > > Mierzejewski > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > could you explain the idea here? Why was there an explicit > > > > Conflicts: > > > > before and why is it better to fail the transaction if you're > > > > not > > > > running inside VirtualBox or KVM? > > > It is a long story, bug reports about this [2]. With this > > > solution > > > (which took sometime to figure out), we can install VirtualBox- > > > guest > > > and VirtualBox in a vm guest [1] I think in middle of bug 3425 > > > , I > > > realize that the root of the problem is we can't > > > install VirtualBox- > > > guest-additions in master (host) system because breaks X11, etc > > > .  > > > So instead use an artificial rpm conflicts, BTW the solution > > > *wasn't* > > > made my me, it was already there when I arrived, I check in > > > %pre > > > if  > > > > > >    $(systemd-detect-virt | grep -iP "oracle|kvm" -c) -eq 0 > > > > > > if systemd-detect-virt doesn't say that is in one oracle or kvm > > > vm > > > , I > > > don't let package (VirtualBox-guest-additions) be installed . > > > > > > I also check kvm because in epel7 vbox vm, systemd-detect-virt > > > says > > > that is in kvm instead oracle ... > > >   > > > From now on, we may install VirtualBox and VirtualBox-guest- > > > additions > > > under a vm , that is the main goal of this change .  > > > > > > Have you any suggestion or something where I can improve ?  > > Ok, I read bug 3425. You shouldn't forbid installation of > > VirtualBox-guest-additions on bare metal by failing in %pre. > > I still don't understand why it can't be installed. From what was > > written in the bug report, you only need to make sure that either > > bothi vboxvideo kmod and X11 driver are present or none of them. > No, VirtualBox-guest-additions breaks hosts (that is the main > problem).  > We must forbid installation of VirtualBox-guest-additions on bare > metal > else (at least) X11 won't start, that is the point .  Breaks hosts how? Why won't X11 start, then? What about Wayland?

> Previous solution was make VirtualBox conflicts with VirtualBox- > guest- > additions. So end user, ends by choose install VirtualBox in host, > but > by that (conflicts solution) both packages can't also be installed > in a > guest system, which is fixed with this brilliant solution.  Failing in %pre, which happens during dnf/rpm transation *after* the package had been downloaded already is not brilliant at all in my opinion. I'd like to think there is a better way, but I first need to understand the issue.

Regards, Dominik