On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 01:22:16PM -0400, Dave Allan wrote: > On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 09:09:55AM -0600, Eric Blake wrote: > > On 05/22/2012 09:00 AM, Dave Allan wrote: > > > On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 04:10:03PM +0200, Martin Kletzander wrote: > > >> The defines QEMU_VNC_PORT_MIN and QEMU_VNC_PORT_MAX were used to find > > >> free port when starting domains. As this was hardcoded to the same > > >> ports as default VNC servers, there were races with these other > > >> programs. This patch includes the possibility to change the default > > >> starting port as well as the maximum port in qemu config file. > > > > > > Hi Martin, > > > > > > Two design comments: > > > > > > 1) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=782814 requests that > > > the default port be changed to avoid conflicts, which seems reasonable > > > to me. > > > > If we choose better defaults for new installations, we still need to > > worry about preserving existing ranges when upgrading old installations. > > This may need some coordination with the spec file doing some %post > > magic to add in vnc_port_min with a value other than 5900 to qemu.conf > > on new installations, but leaving it unspecified when doing an upgrade. > > That's a good point, we certainly don't want to break things on > upgrade. At least one case that would is where people have opened the > old range in a firewall, and now instead of ports, say, 5900-n, now > people will be getting some other range. > > > > 2) I agree with the config option since most applications on the > > > system will want the system defaults. However, IMO in this case an > > > application writer should be given the option in the XML to override > > > the system default. > > > > Agreed - I think we need both solutions - qemu.conf to specify the > > default range, and per-domain XML to specify an override (does the XML > > need to specify a range, or just a single port?). > > I think a range, like the config option. I think this is unneccessary configurability. A qemu config option is sufficient. I just don't see any application wanting to set different default ranges per guest. Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :| -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list