On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 1:10 PM, Daniel P. Berrange<berrange@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > To be honest, the vbox driver shouldn't implement virDomainSave > like this at all, as ignoring the filename parameter is not in > compliance with the API contract. Since there's no corresponding > Restore impl I'd say we'd be better off just removeing the current > virDomainSave impl since its not usable by libvirt apps in its > form There's no corresponding virDomainRestore, but "virsh start $vmname" works: it starts the machine from the snapshot. Instead of being NULL, the pointer to virDomainRestore should be initialized with the function that is called for "start". > THe current virDomainSave/Restore APIs are really pretty limited > in their flexibility, and are well overdue for deprecation and > replacement with something that can be implemented sanely across > all hypervisors. Your very right! As of now: * virDomainRestore works only on three out of 6 hypervisors. * virDomainSave is implemented on 4/6, but vbox's implementation is not conformant and lacks a corresponding restore. Until a better API is defined in libvirt and/or virtualbox, would you be interested in a patch that would tread the filename for the snapshot as a name and which would enable restore support as I described in https://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2009-August/msg00185.html ? -- . ..: Lucian -- Libvir-list mailing list Libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list