Re: xentools33 without X

[Christoph Egger <Christoph_Egger%gmx.de@localhost>]

On Thursday 21 August 2008 15:01:52 Stephen Borrill wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Aug 2008, Brad Pitney wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 1:22 PM, Manuel Bouyer 
> > <bouyer%antioche.eu.org@localhost> 
wrote:
> >> On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 01:16:16PM +0100, Brad Pitney wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> I was wondering, is it possible to have xentools33 without X? styled
> >>> after xentools3 and xentools3-hvm?
> >>
> >> From a quick look, I don't think xentools33 requires X, I see nothing
> >> in the dependancies which should pullup X.
> >>
> >> But if it indeed needs X, then it should be split the way xentools3 was
> >
> > I did try to build xentools33 and it seemed to fail without X, so I
> > left it as I thought the package was still a work in progress. I'll
> > reply again with the error/build failure
>
> The dependence is because of SDL which is only needed by HVM guests. So
> yes, I think it should be split.

I was just about writing a mail saying that. There's no *direct* dependency X.
IMO, the X dependency check is up on the SDL package.

> Alternatively, it should be possible to make SDL an option for people who
> want to use HVM and vnc only (though I've not looked to see whether SDL
> can be disabled).

I am using HVM with vnc only. I never used SDL to access HVM guests.
SDL is indeed optional. I don't have SDL installed on the machine, where
I create/maintain the xentools33 package.


Christoph