On 08/09/2017 03:02 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 02:55:36PM +0200, Michal Privoznik wrote:
>> On 08/09/2017 02:14 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>>> On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 02:00:06PM +0200, Michal Privoznik wrote:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1467245
On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 02:55:36PM +0200, Michal Privoznik wrote:
> On 08/09/2017 02:14 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 02:00:06PM +0200, Michal Privoznik wrote:
> >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1467245
> >>
> >> Currently, there's a bug when undefining a
On 08/09/2017 02:14 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 02:00:06PM +0200, Michal Privoznik wrote:
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1467245
>>
>> Currently, there's a bug when undefining a domain with NVRAM
>> store. Basically, the unlink() of the NVRAM store file
On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 01:14:59PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 02:00:06PM +0200, Michal Privoznik wrote:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1467245
Currently, there's a bug when undefining a domain with NVRAM
store. Basically, the unlink() of the NVRAM
On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 02:00:06PM +0200, Michal Privoznik wrote:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1467245
>
> Currently, there's a bug when undefining a domain with NVRAM
> store. Basically, the unlink() of the NVRAM store file happens
> during the undefine procedure iff domain is
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1467245
Currently, there's a bug when undefining a domain with NVRAM
store. Basically, the unlink() of the NVRAM store file happens
during the undefine procedure iff domain is inactive. So, if
domain is running and undefine is called the file is left