>
> On Tue, 2015-04-14 at 14:08 +0200, Pavel Grunt wrote:
> > Since the domain name is required as a parameter for the '--wait'
> > option (commit a830275344c88aef12166661b68ea2b4429c7212 ), it is
> > neccessary to check whether all domains names are the same.
> > Otherwise
> > it wouldn't be clear which name should be used.
> >
> > related: rhbz#1211573
> > ---
> > src/virt-viewer-main.c | 5 +++++
> > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/src/virt-viewer-main.c b/src/virt-viewer-main.c
> > index 8c1ca80..b2ae0be 100644
> > --- a/src/virt-viewer-main.c
> > +++ b/src/virt-viewer-main.c
> > @@ -108,6 +108,11 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
> > goto cleanup;
> > }
> >
> > + if (args && waitvm != NULL && g_strcmp0(waitvm, args[0])) {
> > + g_printerr(_("\nDomain names mismatch, got '%s' and
> > '%s'\n\n%s\n\n"), waitvm, args[0], help_msg);
> > + goto cleanup;
> > + }
> > +
> > viewer = virt_viewer_new(uri, (args) ? args[0] : waitvm,
> > direct, attach, waitvm != NULL, reconnect);
> > if (viewer == NULL)
> > goto cleanup;
>
>
> I don't remember noticing the change that required an argument for
> the
> --wait switch. I'm not sure that's a great idea. It breaks the
> command-line "API", and (as this commit shows) it requires the user
> to
> specify the same domain twice on the same command-line, which
> requires
> additional sanity-checking. This seems quite awkward. Is it really
> necessary?
>
> Jonathon
>
Hi, it is not necessary to put the domain name twice. Running 'virt-viewer --wait' caused "waiting" for a domain that could not be created. I can rework it another way if you prefer.
Pavel
_______________________________________________
virt-tools-list mailing list
virt-tools-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/virt-tools-list
