On Fri, Oct 02, 2009 at 02:06:12PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 10/02/2009 01:53 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > >This bit of code is exactly why we need a new API - the return value is > >declared to be a virDomainPtr on the destination host, not just a copy > >of the original source domain which no longer even exists on the source > >host if it was a transient domain. > > Yeah, I really did not like this. > > In Chris's code he actually opens the connection (after the migration is > complete) in order to return the destination domain. > > Does that make sense? Not really, because one of the requirements from libvirt-qpid is that we have an API that only needs a localhost connection for migration, to avoid the need to configure client app security credentials. This implies we cannot either require a destination virConnectPtr in the API, not open one internally. Daniel -- |: Red Hat, Engineering, London -o- http://people.redhat.com/berrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org -o- http://ovirt.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: GnuPG: 7D3B9505 -o- F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 :| -- Libvir-list mailing list Libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list