similar to: guest management: 1 and only 1 instance

Hi Rich, We just talked about a new tool virt-diff which can diff files between two guest, suggested by Kamezawa Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu at jp.fujitsu.com> things like below, # virt-diff -Nru --guest=Guest0 --guest=Guest1 /etc/hosts Any thought about this? Another question, what do you think about implement iptables, firewall, yum, rpm, etc into libguestfs? Thanks, Wanlong Gao

Hi all, I have been using Libvirt for several months now and I have only had minimal problems. I had a particular setup and was starting up multiple guests just fine. However, with seemingly no changes I now get the following error when trying to start a guest: virsh start guest0 error: Failed to start domain guest0 error: internal error Process exited while reading console log output: Supported

Hello people, libvirtd (libvirt) 1.0.5.2 virsh 1.0.5.2 virt-manager 0.10.0 Host: Linux localhost 3.9.8-300.fc19.x86_64 #1 SMP Thu Jun 27 19:24:23 UTC 2013 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux Guest1: Linux localhost 3.9.8-300.fc19.i686.PAE #1 SMP Thu Jun 27 19:29:30 UTC 2013 i686 (none) Guest2: Linux localhost 3.9.8-300.fc19.x86_64 #1 SMP Thu Jun 27 19:24:23 UTC 2013 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi everyone, I am trying to get libvirt with qemu-kvm to work on my machines running openSUSE 13.1 / Tumbleweed. My question is in regard to using qemu+ssh, which would be my preference, as I already have a working ssh-key authentication with SSH-Agent. I set the permissions of the manage-socket to 0770, added my user to the libvirt group and set

I have set-up xen on my Intel quad core server. Now running different experiment to measure network throughput in virtualized environment. these are some of the results: Netperf-4.5 results for inter-domain communication. Sr.No.              Client               Server               Time(sec)        Throughput(Mbps)    1                   Guest-1              Dom0                   

Hi ! To all: A Happy New Year ! During the last week I did some investigations why the X11 forwarding on Reliant UNIX Versions 5.44 and 5.45 does not work out of the box with OpenSSH-2.3.0p1. The result fo my investigation is: 1. The OpenSSH sshd opens a TCP/IP-port 6000 + display number and listens to it. This is fine and works with Solaris 7, DEC-OSF 4.0D, Linux and FreeBSD-4.2 but not

I am using procmail with deliver as recommended on the wiki to send mail snagged by SpamAssassin straight to a spam folder. It seemed to be working fine, but now I'm finding messages like this: Sep 17 12:13:47 hosty deliver(whoey): write() failed with mbox file /var/mail/whoey: File too large I don't think this is a setrlimit problem -- the host operating system is OpenBSD 4.0. My

On 03.07.2013 13:43, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Tue, Jul 02, 2013 at 01:25:21PM +0200, poma wrote: >> Hello people, >> >> libvirtd (libvirt) 1.0.5.2 >> virsh 1.0.5.2 >> virt-manager 0.10.0 >> >> Host: >> Linux localhost 3.9.8-300.fc19.x86_64 #1 SMP Thu Jun 27 19:24:23 UTC >> 2013 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux >> Guest1: >>

Hello Here, Here is the schema I want to have. Sorry for my bad ascii work ;) |----------------------------------| |----------------------------------| |SERVER1 | |SERVER2 | | | |

Hi, Using FOP, I've met a situation which makes me ask this simple question : Are both A and B commands bellow equivalent ? A. CLI: originate SIP/9122 application dial Local/9123 at local B. AMI/FOP: 192.168.64.5 -> Action: Originate 192.168.64.5 -> Channel: SIP/9122 192.168.64.5 -> Async: True 192.168.64.5 -> Callerid: 9122 Guest2 <9122> 192.168.64.5 -> Exten: 9123

Greetings - I am going through some testing steps to expand a logical volume and the corresponding filesystem on a KVM guest and have run across a deficiency in my knowledge. I spent the afternoon yesterday googling for answers, but had have come up blank still. What I am trying to do is resize the file system to use the additional disk space that I added to the logical volume that the

In my system I''d like to be able to share one disk among multiple xen quests and boot them up using this shared disk. Is it possible to set a flag somewhere to avoid the following error. # xm create guest2 kernel="/TMP/vmlinuz" ramdisk=/TMP/initrd.img bootloader="" extra=rescue Using config file "./guest2". Error: The uname "/dev/sdz" is already

Hi All, I am sure this has been answered somewhere in the list in the past, but I can''t find it. I was wondering if the linux guest netfront driver has GRO support in it. tcpdump shows packets coming in with 1500 bytes, although the eth0 in dom0 and the vif corresponding to the linux guest in dom0 is showing that they receive large packet: In dom0: eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr

This is my second mail because the first one turned into a two page novel. Basically my question is this, what is your opinion on the following, in regards to having to know about the os and USE in your hosting environtment. Here is my problem... We have a sales guy that sold people on the idea of having 4 windows clients, and 2 "filestore" servers. filestore1 backs up to filestore2 so

I have observed 3 scenarios after I reboot the host with 2 guests (which are supposed to autostart after boot/reboot of the host): 1. Default network is created but I can not ping guests. Gests don't have assigned IP address or they both have IP address 192.168.122.100. 2. Default network is not created. 3. Default netork is properly created and everything works fine. In each case guests are

It's not. In fact it's explicitly telling you that it's *not* forwarding. On 22 December 2015 at 15:55, Florent B <florent at coppint.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I have a lot of messages like this in my Tinc 1.1-git log : > > Sending packet from host5 (MYSELF port 655) to host4 (192.168.0.4 port > 655) via host4 (192.168.0.4 port 655) (UDP) > > Is it expected ?

On 11.11.2016 19:17, Arkadiusz Mi?kiewicz wrote: > On Friday 11 of November 2016, Aki Tuomi wrote: > >> If you are interested in testing, please find patch attached that allows >> you to specify >> >> local_name *.foo.bar { >> } >> >> or >> >> local_name *.*.foo.bar { >> } >> >> so basically you can now use certificate

plain text document attachment (hvvm.patch) OK, some explaination is needed here. The goal of lguest with paravirt ops, is to have one kernel that can be loaded both as a host and a guest. To do this, we need to map an area in virtual memory that both the host and guest share. But I don't want any conflicts with the guest. One solution is just to do a single area for boot up, and then use the

plain text document attachment (hvvm.patch) OK, some explaination is needed here. The goal of lguest with paravirt ops, is to have one kernel that can be loaded both as a host and a guest. To do this, we need to map an area in virtual memory that both the host and guest share. But I don't want any conflicts with the guest. One solution is just to do a single area for boot up, and then use the

Hello, When sending this AMI request ... 192.168.64.5 -> Action: Originate 192.168.64.5 -> Channel: SIP/9122 192.168.64.5 -> Async: True 192.168.64.5 -> Callerid: 9122 Guest2 <9122> 192.168.64.5 -> Exten: 9123 192.168.64.5 -> Context: local 192.168.64.5 -> Priority: 1 ... I've got this INVITE from Asterisk INVITE sip:9121 at 192.168.100.198:5060;user=phone SIP/2.0