I Agree, KVM without remote management is silly. Fedora seems to have it
solved, currently I use KVM/virsh on a Fedora 13 host (libvirt-
client-0.8.2-1.fc13.x86_64 libvirt-0.8.2-1.fc13.x86_64) with Ubuntu's
0.8.2 Virt-Manager.
But yes, do give a (much) higher priority!
--
libvirt-bin hypervisor
I Agree, KVM without remote management is silly. Fedora seems to have it
solved, currently I use KVM/virsh on a Fedora 13 host (libvirt-
client-0.8.2-1.fc13.x86_64 libvirt-0.8.2-1.fc13.x86_64) with Ubuntu's
0.8.2 Virt-Manager.
But yes, do give a (much) higher priority!
--
libvirt-bin hypervisor
I tried the most recet version from Maverick, the problem is still
there:
~$ virsh iface-list
error: Failed to list active interfaces
error: this function is not supported by the hypervisor:
virConnectNumOfInterfaces
~$ virsh version
Compiled against library: libvir 0.8.1
Using library: libvir
I tried the most recet version from Maverick, the problem is still
there:
~$ virsh iface-list
error: Failed to list active interfaces
error: this function is not supported by the hypervisor:
virConnectNumOfInterfaces
~$ virsh version
Compiled against library: libvir 0.8.1
Using library: libvir
Between the lines; I can conform as as well:
2.6.28-11-generic is OK
2.6.28-13-generic VM (Windows XP with SP3) is not working.
--
Certain VMs do not run under KVM using 2.6.30-rc5 kernel
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/379991
You received this bug notification because you are a member of
