On Fri, Sep 02, 2011 at 08:08:58AM -0600, Eric Blake wrote: > On 09/02/2011 05:34 AM, Daniel Veillard wrote: > >On Fri, Sep 02, 2011 at 07:23:38PM +0800, Osier Yang wrote: > >>于 2011年09月02日 18:21, Daniel Veillard 写道: > > Well I would not modify cmdDomblkstat and instead create a new command > >and a new function for the new API > > > >>And per the new API has some same fields with old API, and seems > >>all of virsh commands try to fallback to old API if new API is introduced. > > > > yes but the new API will provide informations in a different order > >and is potentially more expensive, so I'm not sure I really want to use > >the new API for the old command > > Maybe something like "domblkfullstat"... > > > > But if someone else disagrees with me I'm fine being in the minority :-) > > Personally, I'd like to keep a single virsh command for both APIs, > just like 'virsh migrate' handles both virDomainMigrate and > virDomainMigrate2. I don't know if it's better to default to the > old or the new API, but it is easy enough to provide a flag that > swaps the default to call the alternate API. Okay, I surrender, I don't have a strong opinion for the virsh command option :-) 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