[et-mgmt-tools] virt-bridge option not working in koan 0.8.0?

[Sandor W. Sklar]

On Mar 27, 2008, at 1:13 PM, Michael DeHaan wrote:
> Sandor W. Sklar wrote:
>>
>> Hmm, ok, thanks ... that makes sense, but the wiki page clearly  
>> shows it being used as an option to "koan" ...
>>
>> To force a specific choice, or to use a bridge that does not follow  
>> the pethX/ethX convention, you can use --virt-bridge and specify  
>> the name of any bridge you like. Note that this must be a /real/  
>> bridge, and not a physical interface.
>>
>> koan --server=bootserver.example.org --profile=RHEL5-i386 --virt -- 
>> virt-bridge=peth0
>
> Yes, this was trimmed in a previous release. It's something we can  
> consider adding back if it's useful, though in general I want to  
> limit the amount of options we provide to koan to keep the focus  
> around centralized management and repeatable profiles.

No, that makes sense.  For me, (and understand, I'm a total beginner  
at the koan and virtualization stuff here), the biggest problem is  
keeping the documentation up-to-date and in sync with the current  
version of the tools.  I'd love to contribute to the wiki, once I've  
got a better understanding of all of this, but I think in general,  
while the tools are of excellent quality, and the support provided on  
this and other lists is superb, it would be good to have some more  
fundamental documentation or "how-tos", targeted perhaps at people  
familiar with RHEL and general Linux administration, but who aren't  
that in touch with the deployment of virtual machines.  This might be  
my shortcoming though, and perhaps the Cobbler/Koan environment isn't  
the proper place to host that type of doc.


> I believe this was pulled at the same time we added multiple virtual  
> NIC support for cobbler (where you can specify dual homed virtual  
> machines, etc), since then it would be possible to create a profile  
> that required a specific number of NICs, and in that context, you  
> could override it with an incompatible configuration (such as one  
> NIC). However that's a shoot-foot scenario so I'm not sure the use  
> case justifies removing the option.
>
> Thoughts?
>>

Ah, well, I like options where I can get them, but only options that  
help me, not those that I can shoot myself with.  :-)

Thanks,
	-s-