On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 01:32:48PM +0100, Pino Toscano wrote: > On Friday 14 February 2014 16:19:39 Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 03:48:34PM +0100, Pino Toscano wrote: > > > a) adding arch=.. keys in entries > > > b) rename (or just copy, to avoid breaking older virt-builders) keys > > > to> > > > $distro-$version-$arch > > > > > > c) to not break compatibility with user input virt-builder joins > > > > > > $user_selection + $arch = $user_selection-$arch, and looks in the > > > index > > > > > > d) default $arch to `uname -m/p`, if --arch is not specified > > > > os-version is a unique key in the index today, but does it need to be? > > You could have multiple os-version entries differing only by at least > > the following fields: > > > > . revision > > . arch > > . format > > > > So your unique key internally in virt-builder would be (os-version, > > revision, arch, format) ... > > Sure, changing the key is not actually an issue by itself; the issue > comes up whether we want the "new" indexes to be usable by older > virt-builders, which want os-version as unique key. > > OTOH, if we switch to the virt-builder.d/*.conf configuration files, > those would need to be written anew, so could automatically gain new > features incompatible with older virt-builders.
Agreed. It would be easier to ship two sets of indexes, and phase out the 1.24-compatible ones over time. Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones virt-top is 'top' for virtual machines. Tiny program with many powerful monitoring features, net stats, disk stats, logging, etc. http://people.redhat.com/~rjones/virt-top _______________________________________________ Libguestfs mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libguestfs
