On Wed, 2019-03-06 at 09:30 +0100, Ján Tomko wrote: > On Wed, Mar 06, 2019 at 08:41:48AM +0100, Peter Krempa wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 05, 2019 at 16:56:43 +0100, Andrea Bolognani wrote: > > > So I agree neither scenario is exactly perfect, but I still think > > > adding non-transitional alias devices would overall be more > > > user-friendly. > > > > I don't think it makes sense to add it at the qemu level. From libvirt's > > point of view users should be shielded from any qemu impl detail or > > inconsistency as libvirt is the 'user friendly'[1] layer. In qemu the > > devices would be the same and thus does not make sense to do that > > because it would be more confusing. > > > > You can argue that we should add the alias at the libvirt level though. > > You can, but please don't. It would seem nobody except me thinks this is a good idea, so I guess I'll just drop it now. -- Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
