Description of problem:
Libvirt provides a virtual networking capability for users who are unable to
make use of bridging - eg Laptop users, anyone with Wifi, anyone using
NetworkManager, or anyone without connectivity.
This sets up an isolated bridge device to which guests attach & NATs to outside
world. This requires dnsmasq to provide DNS and DHCP services to guest VMs,
since they can't get DHCP across the NAT forwarding.
The dnsmasq package is part of the (former) Fedora Extras, and is used by
libvirt in Fedora 6/7
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
Steps to Reproduce:
1. Start the libvirt default network (virsh net-start default)
2. Verify dnsmasq has started on Dom0 attached to that virbr0 device
2. Create a guest attached to the network
3. Try and configure guest with DHCP
dnsmasq running & DHCP works in guest
Recommend taking existing package from Fedora Extras
This request was evaluated by Red Hat Product Management for inclusion in a Red
Hat Enterprise Linux maintenance release. Product Management has requested
further review of this request by Red Hat Engineering, for potential
inclusion in a Red Hat Enterprise Linux Update release for currently deployed
products. This request is not yet committed for inclusion in an Update
added from fedora devel to dis-5E-U1 for CVS, brew, and comps file.
Daniel Veillard (email@example.com) is set as the owner of the package.
the built completed successfully.
Just wondering, libvirt is limited to arches i386, x86_64 and ia64.
Since dnsmasq is added solely as an helper for this libvirt update,
should we use the same set of limited arches, or the whole set.
- minimize the disruption of adding the new package
- increase the gap between the architectures
- we may miss some bugs only raised on the new architectures
Seems the cons override the pros, but I wonder if there are release
engineering rules for such a case,
I just thinked:
I think dnsmasq should _not_ be neccesary Req from libvirt, its just
another DHCP server, a simple lightweight one, and should be build on all our
There can be some case when dnsmasq is used for small office DHCP setup
and not for xen !, since its very easy to configure, so building it for all
arches make a sense at all.
Thats my 5 cent.
Well the Requires is required because libvirt may exec dnsmasq, that's why we are
adding it at this point :-)
Let's keep it built on all arches,
An advisory has been issued which should help the problem
described in this bug report. This report is therefore being
closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For more information
on the solution and/or where to find the updated files,
please follow the link below. You may reopen this bug report
if the solution does not work for you.