On Wed, Apr 06, 2011 at 05:02:36PM +0800, Osier Yang wrote: > ä 2011å04æ06æ 16:50, Daniel Veillard åé: > >On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 08:55:01AM -0600, Eric Blake wrote: > >>should leave file intact if and only if the restore failed, and: > > > > The problem there is that you are changing the command behaviour. > >The user may snapshot the disk separately and use this to implement > >a simplified domain snapshot. Doing the remove may avoid troubles > >for those not knowing what they are doing, but also break something > >for those who know what they are doing. > > Somehow this is true, but as we have API and virsh commands > for snapshot specificly, is it fine to make a change on the virsh > manual to tell the user about we remove the state file if restoring > succeeded? I did that when doing v3 patch, :-) Still that can be considered a regression, that behaviour is the same since the introduction of the API years ago, we can't change it now just because we think it's cool. Document the fact that in general once the restore suceeded the file should be removed since the data are unlikely to be reusable without loss of integrity, but you can't change the behaviour. Daniel -- Daniel Veillard | libxml Gnome XML XSLT toolkit http://xmlsoft.org/ daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxx | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/ http://veillard.com/ | virtualization library http://libvirt.org/ -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list