[Libosinfo] [PATCH] win7, winxp: Upgrade spice-guest-tools to 0.100

[Fabiano Fidêncio]

On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 6:26 PM, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak)
<zeeshanak at gnome.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 1:43 PM, Fabiano Fidêncio <fabiano at fidencio.org> wrote:
>> Zeeshan,
>>
>> On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 12:59 PM, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak)
>> <zeeshanak at gnome.org> wrote:
>>> Hi Fabiano,
>>>
>>> On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 11:00 PM, Fabiano Fidêncio <fidencio at redhat.com> wrote:
>>>> On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 9:10 PM, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak)
>>>> <zeeshanak at gnome.org> wrote:
>>>>> ---
>>>>>  data/os/microsoft.com/win-7.xml.in  | 8 ++++----
>>>>>  data/os/microsoft.com/win-xp.xml.in | 8 ++++----
>>>>>  2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/data/os/microsoft.com/win-7.xml.in b/data/os/microsoft.com/win-7.xml.in
>>>>> index 2cb6488..8da4ccb 100644
>>>>> --- a/data/os/microsoft.com/win-7.xml.in
>>>>> +++ b/data/os/microsoft.com/win-7.xml.in
>>>>> @@ -205,8 +205,8 @@
>>>>>
>>>>>      <!-- All virtio and QXL device drivers, and spice-vdagent -->
>>>>>      <driver arch="i686" location="https://zeenix.fedorapeople.org/drivers/win-tools/postinst" signed="false">
>>>>> -      <file>spice-guest-tools-0.65.exe</file>
>>>>> -      <file>spice-guest-tools-0.65.cmd</file>
>>>>> +      <file>spice-guest-tools-0.100.exe</file>
>>>>> +      <file>spice-guest-tools-0.100.cmd</file>
>>>>>        <file>redhat09.cer</file>
>>>>>        <file>redhat10.cer</file>
>>>>
>>>> I've noticed that these certificate files are not used anymore with
>>>> the spice-guest-tools-0.100. So, is there any reason for keeping those
>>>> files here?
>>>
>>> I was not aware of that. I was under the impression that they are
>>> required by Windows.
>>
>> According to https://zeenix.fedorapeople.org/drivers/win-tools/postinst/spice-guest-tools-0.74.cmd
>> they are.
>> But then you removed the files for the 0.100.cmd file and that's the
>> reason I thought they are not needed anymore.
>> So, most likely they are still needed and those lines got removed
>> mistakenly, is it?
>
> Removed where? I have not removed any files.

Please, take a look on the link that I pointed out, Zeeshan.
Here is the content of spice-guest-tools-0.74.cmd:

certutil -addstore "TrustedPublisher" redhat09.cer
certutil -addstore "TrustedPublisher" redhat10.cer
spice-guest-tools-0.74.exe /S
certutil -delstore "TrustedPublisher" "Red Hat, Inc."

EXIT

And here is the content of spice-guest-tools-0.100.cmd:

spice-guest-tools-0.100.exe /S
EXIT

Seems that you removed those lines while copying and pasting the .cmd
file's content.

>
>> How did you test the 0.100.cmd file?
>
> I have not, yet, no.

Please, test it before submitting the patch then or at least make
clear that you submitted something not test at all. ;-\

>
>>>> Also, spice-space.org provides a direct link for the latest driver[0],
>>>> what makes the maintainability easier. Why not start using that for
>>>> the spice-guest-tools?
>>>
>>> Well the API/XML allows for only one location per driver so if we can
>>> ditch both certificate and cmd files, we can simply direct to the
>>> official location.
>>>
>>>> Another question that comes to my mind is why don't we generate/keep
>>>> the .cmd file inside libosinfo as we do for the installation scripts?
>>>
>>> Because it's driver-specific (it's only meant to pass the /S flag to
>>> actual driver binary) and installation scripts are kept generic and
>>> independent of drivers. App is informed of the driver from the OS
>>> entry and if it decides to install them, it copies them to install
>>> disk and informs the scripts about location of driver files and
>>> scripts then just install binaries, as instructed by the app.
>>>
>>> Feel free to suggest a better way of handing this.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Being completely honest here, I do believe the best way to handle the
>> installation of spice-guest-tools is not on libosinfo neither on
>> gnome-boxes.
>> It seems as one the things that must be handled by
>> libvirt-designer/builder in the future.
>
> libvirt-designer/builder are not going to be made of magic. They are
> going to rely heavily on libosinfo and will have a lot of code/logic
> that currently Boxes has. So they are not going to solve anything for
> libosinfo. If you have a suggestion on how to do things better
> (through these libraries), it should apply to Boxes currently.

So, we can introduce the spice-guest-tools-latest.cmd file on Boxes
tree, have it installed and copy it from the user's disk when it's
needed. It works for me.

>
>> So, my suggestion for now is to keep those files under
>> spice-space.org. In the same way we have the
>> spice-guest-tools-latest.exe we can have the
>> spice-guest-tools-latest.cmd and the certificates (if they are really
>> needed). IMO, it would make the maintainability easier as it would be
>> done for free, for every release.
>>
>> Christophe, Zeeshan, what do you think about my suggestion?
>
> Sure. Someone else would need to make it happen though. :)
>

I'd like to hear from Christophe here as well.

>
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Zeeshan Ali (Khattak)

Best Regards,
--
Fabiano Fidêncio