On Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 03:27:24AM -0700, Andrea Bolognani wrote: > On Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 09:57:15AM GMT, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 01:54:47AM -0700, Andrea Bolognani wrote: > > > Is there much of a difference between having an explicit noop backend > > > that is checked for availability after all other ones, and simply not > > > failing to initialize the driver if a backend can't be found? > > > > I actually sent a patch for the latter last night > > Awesome, thanks! > > > > I'm still unclear on how networking on FreeBSD could work at all > > > until now. Aren't the iptables rules needed for guest connectivity? > > > Or did I misunderstand their purpose? > > > > It wouldn't have worked, but the problem is that we now kill the > > entire libvirtd startup, instead of successfully starting a (broken) > > network driver. Both are broken, but now the brokenness has spread > > to the bits that do matter. > > I get that, it's just that I'd be extremely surprised to learn that > guest network connectivity hasn't worked on FreeBSD all this time. > Surely that can't be right! Roman, what am I missing? This is only the libvirt virtual network backend. I presume BSD hosted guests could just use one of the other network backend options. With regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
