[libvirt] virsh capabilities vs. domcapabilities

Daniel P. Berrange berrange at redhat.com
Thu Jul 17 09:11:47 UTC 2014

On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 11:05:08AM +0200, Michal Privoznik wrote:
> ># tools/virsh domcapabilities --virttype kvm
> >error: failed to get emulator capabilities
> >error: invalid argument: at least one of emulatorbin or architecture
> >fields must be present
> >
> >Would it be nicer to behave the same as 'virsh capabilities' and give
> >the details of the default binary in this case?
> Sure, but in order to get default binary we must know architecture (consider
> the case where you have both /usr/bin/qemu-system-x86_64 and
> /usr/bin/qemu-system-i686). Although, having only one qemu binary on the
> system makes it easy to find the default, doesn't it? Patch on the way.

IMHO it would be preferrable to always default to virArchFromHost()
if arch is none, since that gives a predictable default value, as
opposed to probing emulators which is unpredictable

|: http://berrange.com      -o-    http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org              -o-             http://virt-manager.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org       -o-         http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: http://entangle-photo.org       -o-       http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|

More information about the libvir-list mailing list