On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 07:08:33AM -0400, Guido Günther wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 12:05:56AM -0500, Charles Duffy wrote:
> > It appears that this patch was applied (in commit
> > 45616162db2d1e807dbe70e60c67cb701cbd06d8) with the virDomainIsActive(vm)
> > checks removed from qemudDomainC
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 02:06:29PM -0500, Charles Duffy wrote:
> Blerg; the more complex patch I provided was dangerously wrong.
>
> Just applying the one that corrects the message WORKSFORME.
Okay, done,
thanks !
Daniel
--
Red Hat Virtualization group http://redhat.com/virtualization/
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 12:05:56AM -0500, Charles Duffy wrote:
> It appears that this patch was applied (in commit
> 45616162db2d1e807dbe70e60c67cb701cbd06d8) with the virDomainIsActive(vm)
> checks removed from qemudDomainCreate, such that we fail out with
> "domain [...] is already defined
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 01:49:50PM -0500, Charles Duffy wrote:
> Daniel Veillard wrote:
> > Are you disagreeing with the message (which your patch doesn't fix)
> >or with the semantic of the check (and then why allow to create a domain
> >reusing the UUID of another defined but not running domain,
Blerg; the more complex patch I provided was dangerously wrong.
Just applying the one that corrects the message WORKSFORME.
--
Libvir-list mailing list
Libvir-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
Daniel Veillard wrote:
Are you disagreeing with the message (which your patch doesn't fix)
or with the semantic of the check (and then why allow to create a domain
reusing the UUID of another defined but not running domain, I can only
see confusion or security problems in doing so)
The act of
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 12:05:56AM -0500, Charles Duffy wrote:
> It appears that this patch was applied (in commit
> 45616162db2d1e807dbe70e60c67cb701cbd06d8) with the virDomainIsActive(vm)
> checks removed from qemudDomainCreate, such that we fail out with
> "domain [...] is already defined and
It appears that this patch was applied (in commit
45616162db2d1e807dbe70e60c67cb701cbd06d8) with the virDomainIsActive(vm)
checks removed from qemudDomainCreate, such that we fail out with
"domain [...] is already defined and running" even if the domain is only
defined but not running.
The at
On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 04:12:05PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 10:41:31AM -0400, Guido G?nther wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 10:01:32AM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
[..snip..]
> > > You need to check for UUID clash too.
> > Indeed. But before fixing this I w
