Am 20.04.2018 um 21:20 hat Peter Krempa geschrieben: > On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 13:55:35 +0200, Kevin Wolf wrote: > > Am 19.04.2018 um 17:25 hat Peter Krempa geschrieben: > > > Similarly to the 'raw' case add tests for bochs, cloop, dmg, ploop, vdi > > > vhd, and vpc. Covering all supproted non-backing formats. > > > > > > Note that the JSON name for 'ploop' maps to 'parallels' and 'vhd' maps > > > to 'vhdx'. > > > > Your -drive lines below mention format=ploop/vhd, though. That wouldn't > > actually work. > > So, is it something that we should actually forbid? I did not actually > try all of the weird formats, so I just assumed that if we'd happily > generate the -drive command line and the 'blockdev' version exists it's > equivalent. I thought it's just a mistake in the commit message and that libvirt actually does the translation described here. So it would use -drive format=parallels instead of ploop. > > (Also 'vhd' as an alias for 'vhdx' is super confusing, because VHD is > > really the name of the format implemented by QEMU's 'vpc' driver - which > > is already a source of confusion on its own.) > > Hmmm, maybe that is a bug in my implementation. Since libvirt has a VPC > format and also a VHD format I thohght that VHD is just another name for > 'vhxd'. If they are different, we maybe should forbid it altogether. I > confess that I did a simple prefix match rather than any complex > analysis. Maybe double-check, but your assumption might be right. There would be little reason to have both VPC and VHD, when both are names for the same thing (except as aliases, possibly). Kevin
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
