[libvirt] virsh capabilities vs. domcapabilities

Michal Privoznik mprivozn at redhat.com
Thu Jul 17 09:13:11 UTC 2014

On 17.07.2014 11:11, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> 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

Yep, that's exactly what I've done in my patch:



More information about the libvir-list mailing list