Re: PATCH: Fix name uniqueness check

["Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange@redhat.com>]

On Tue, Oct 02, 2007 at 10:11:01PM +0900, Masaki Kanno wrote:
> Hi Dan,
> 
> Thanks for your effort and your patch. 
> I think that the allow/reject rules are wonderful.  But, I have a few 
> comments. 
> 
> 
> I agree the rule of the following case. 
> But, the behavior is (redefine+rename+create), isn't it?

Yes, that is actually what it ends up doing, replacing the config for the 
matching UUID causes a rename.

> When I tested the following case, the result was as follows. 
> I think that we should reject xm new command if same UUID vm is active. 

I hadn't noticed that, but its easy to special case this particular
case / scenario to be rejected. Or we could fix it to correctly rename
the existing running VM which might be more user friendly. 

Either option is a small add-on patch to my previous submissions.

Regards,
Dan.
-- 
|=- Red Hat, Engineering, Emerging Technologies, Boston.  +1 978 392 2496 -=|
|=-           Perl modules: http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/              -=|
|=-               Projects: http://freshmeat.net/~danielpb/               -=|
|=-  GnuPG: 7D3B9505   F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505  -=|