On Tue, Dec 26, 2023 at 10:47:53PM +0100, Guido Günther wrote: > On Tue, Dec 26, 2023 at 01:27:11PM -0800, Matt Taggart wrote: > > Interestingly, the virt-manager package only Suggests virt-viewer but, if > > anything, I would think the dependency would be stronger there? So maybe > > Recommends or even Depends? But I guess it's possible to use virt-manager to > > manage VMs without ever needing to launch virt-viewer, so maybe Suggests is > > correct there as well. > > virt-manager merely suggests virt-viewer since it's basically a useful > tool to have too (virt-manager doesn't need virt-viewer to show any > consoles) so a very weak relation makes sense
Agreed, virt-manager can do pretty much everything virt-viewer can
and loads more, so the Suggests makes sense there.
> virtinst recommends virt-viewer so people installing it get a set of
> tools to install VMs and connect to their UI so a stronger relation
> looks justified to me.
>
> It's not a dependency as (as you note) there are use cases where it
> works without virt-viewer but the default should (in my opinion) be
> to have a working set and not let the user figure out why they can't
> connect to their VMs UI.
I would also like to see the Recommends demoted to a Suggests.
One of the primary use cases of virt-install is setting up headless
guests on a headless host, and the additional dependencies get in the
way there. Plus virt-install provides good, actionable feedback for
those cases where having virt-viewer available would actually make
things better:
WARNING Unable to connect to graphical console: virt-viewer is not
installed. Please install the 'virt-viewer' package.
Note additionally that Debian seems to be in the minority here: I
checked Fedora, openSUSE, Arch and Alpine, and for none of those
virt-viewer is dragged in along with virt-install.
Can we please reconsider this?
--
Andrea Bolognani <e...@kiyuko.org>
Resistance is futile, you will be garbage collected.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
