Keir,
I just saw the changeset 17265. Are you sure that this is correct?
--- a/tools/python/xen/xend/XendConfig.py Thu Mar 20
10:48:21 2008 +0000
+++ b/tools/python/xen/xend/XendConfig.py Thu Mar 20
17:45:00 2008 +0000
@@ -991,7 +991,7 @@ class XendConfig(dict):
dev_type, dev_cfg =
self[''devices''][dev_uuid]
is_bootable =
dev_cfg.get(''bootable'',
0)
config.append([''bootable'',
int(is_bootable)])
- config.append([''VDI''],
dev_cfg.get(''VDI'', ''''))
+ config.append([''VDI'',
dev_cfg.get(''VDI'', '''')])
sxpr.append([''device'',
config])
I get a line in the VM''s config file that looks like this
(VDI )
It''s missing the UUID now.
Even though the format was different than of the ''bootable''
above, I did
get the correct output with it,
Stefan
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
No, I¹m not 100% sure, but without this change I get a backtrace in xend.log because append() takes only one argument. Looking at the line immediately above I determined that this was most likely the correct change to make, and that the previous placement of the square bracket was a typo. -- Keir On 24/3/08 15:21, "Stefan Berger" <stefanb@us.ibm.com> wrote:> > Keir, > > I just saw the changeset 17265. Are you sure that this is correct? > > --- a/tools/python/xen/xend/XendConfig.py Thu Mar 20 10:48:21 > 2008 +0000 > +++ b/tools/python/xen/xend/XendConfig.py Thu Mar 20 17:45:00 > 2008 +0000 > @@ -991,7 +991,7 @@ class XendConfig(dict): > dev_type, dev_cfg > self[''devices''][dev_uuid] > is_bootable = dev_cfg.get(''bootable'', 0) > config.append([''bootable'', > int(is_bootable)]) > - config.append([''VDI''], dev_cfg.get(''VDI'', > '''')) > + config.append([''VDI'', dev_cfg.get(''VDI'', > '''')]) > > sxpr.append([''device'', config]) > > I get a line in the VM''s config file that looks like this > > (VDI ) > > It''s missing the UUID now. > Even though the format was different than of the ''bootable'' above, I did get > the correct output with it, > > Stefan >_______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@eu.citrix.com> wrote on 03/24/2008 11:25:03 AM:> No, I?m not 100% sure, but without this change I get a backtrace in > xend.log because append() takes only one argument. Looking at the > line immediately above I determined that this was most likely the > correct change to make, and that the previous placement of the > square bracket was a typo.No, you are right. It was a mistake and it did throw an execption, but even with that mistake it wrote the line correctly... I tried it again and the new patch also shows the VDI''s uuid correcly. Stefan> > -- Keir > > On 24/3/08 15:21, "Stefan Berger" <stefanb@us.ibm.com> wrote:> > Keir, > > I just saw the changeset 17265. Are you sure that this is correct? > > --- a/tools/python/xen/xend/XendConfig.py Thu Mar 20 > 10:48:21 2008 +0000 > +++ b/tools/python/xen/xend/XendConfig.py Thu Mar 20 > 17:45:00 2008 +0000 > @@ -991,7 +991,7 @@ class XendConfig(dict): > dev_type, dev_cfg = > self[''devices''][dev_uuid] > is_bootable =dev_cfg.get(''bootable'', 0)> config.append([''bootable'', > int(is_bootable)]) > - config.append([''VDI''], dev_cfg. > get(''VDI'', '''')) > + config.append([''VDI'', dev_cfg. > get(''VDI'', '''')]) > > sxpr.append([''device'', config]) > > I get a line in the VM''s config file that looks like this > > (VDI ) > > It''s missing the UUID now. > Even though the format was different than of the ''bootable'' above, I > did get the correct output with it, > > Stefan_______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel