Re: virt-bridge option not working in koan 0.8.0?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




On Mar 27, 2008, at 1:13 PM, Michael DeHaan wrote:
Sandor W. Sklar wrote:

Hmm, ok, thanks ... that makes sense, but the wiki page clearly shows it being used as an option to "koan" ...

To force a specific choice, or to use a bridge that does not follow the pethX/ethX convention, you can use --virt-bridge and specify the name of any bridge you like. Note that this must be a /real/ bridge, and not a physical interface.

koan --server=bootserver.example.org --profile=RHEL5-i386 --virt -- virt-bridge=peth0

Yes, this was trimmed in a previous release. It's something we can consider adding back if it's useful, though in general I want to limit the amount of options we provide to koan to keep the focus around centralized management and repeatable profiles.

No, that makes sense. For me, (and understand, I'm a total beginner at the koan and virtualization stuff here), the biggest problem is keeping the documentation up-to-date and in sync with the current version of the tools. I'd love to contribute to the wiki, once I've got a better understanding of all of this, but I think in general, while the tools are of excellent quality, and the support provided on this and other lists is superb, it would be good to have some more fundamental documentation or "how-tos", targeted perhaps at people familiar with RHEL and general Linux administration, but who aren't that in touch with the deployment of virtual machines. This might be my shortcoming though, and perhaps the Cobbler/Koan environment isn't the proper place to host that type of doc.


I believe this was pulled at the same time we added multiple virtual NIC support for cobbler (where you can specify dual homed virtual machines, etc), since then it would be possible to create a profile that required a specific number of NICs, and in that context, you could override it with an incompatible configuration (such as one NIC). However that's a shoot-foot scenario so I'm not sure the use case justifies removing the option.

Thoughts?


Ah, well, I like options where I can get them, but only options that help me, not those that I can shoot myself with. :-)

Thanks,
	-s-



_______________________________________________
et-mgmt-tools mailing list
et-mgmt-tools@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/et-mgmt-tools

[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Legacy List]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Big List of Linux Books]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]

  Powered by Linux