[Xen-devel] Re: changeset 17265

[Stefan Berger <stefanb@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> 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@xxxxxxxxxx>
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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel