On 03/01/18 10:47, Erik Skultety wrote:
On Sat, Dec 30, 2017 at 09:15:34AM +0100, frankie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
From: Francesc Guasch <frankie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
diff --git a/lib/Sys/Virt/StoragePool.pm b/lib/Sys/Virt/StoragePool.pm
index 0bc1d50..2ba5101 100644
--- a/lib/Sys/Virt/StoragePool.pm
+++ b/lib/Sys/Virt/StoragePool.pm
@@ -115,14 +115,11 @@ C<define_storage_pool> method in L<Sys::Virt>.
Remove the configuration associated with a storage pool previously defined
with the C<define_storage pool> method in L<Sys::Virt>. If the storage pool is
-running, you probably want to use the C<shutdown> or C<destroy>
-methods instead.
+running, you probably want to use the C<destroy> method instead.
If you want to make the pool unmanaged by libvirt, destroy doesn't help at
all since it would only stop a running pool, but wouldn't undefine it.
Therefore, we should either omit the sentence completely or use something like
this: 'Calling C<undefine> on a running pool makes it transient, thus leaving
the underlying object intact, so if object discard is desired, C<destroy> should
be called first.'
Good point. But I use destroy to set the storage pool inactive, it works
for me.
However, truth to be told, even my suggested sentence isn't correct, since
undefine on running pools results in an error - we need to fix that since it
should behave the same way as domains and make them transient. Maybe we can
drop the additional sentence now and update it later when things work the
expected way.
My initial concern was that shutdown is not in the Storage Pool API.
Only destroy can be used. I guess it got pasted from the Domain module.
--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
