From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LOt56-00040b-6o for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2009 07:18:16 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LOt54-0003zq-N6 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2009 07:18:15 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=35482 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LOt54-0003zm-AZ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2009 07:18:14 -0500 Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:36880) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LOt53-00028O-S6 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2009 07:18:14 -0500 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (int-mx2.corp.redhat.com [172.16.27.26]) by mx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n0JCIC8l013017 for ; Mon, 19 Jan 2009 07:18:12 -0500 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id n0JCIDA5003345 for ; Mon, 19 Jan 2009 07:18:13 -0500 Received: from dhcp-1-237.tlv.redhat.com (dhcp-1-237.tlv.redhat.com [10.35.1.237]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n0JCICV3021578 for ; Mon, 19 Jan 2009 07:18:12 -0500 Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2009 14:16:29 +0200 From: Gleb Natapov Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3] Stop VM on ENOSPC error. Message-ID: <20090119121629.GK11299@redhat.com> References: <20090118110509.GG11299@redhat.com> <18804.27240.886522.337700@mariner.uk.xensource.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <18804.27240.886522.337700@mariner.uk.xensource.com> Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 11:56:24AM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote: > Gleb Natapov writes ("[Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3] Stop VM on ENOSPC error."): > > And repeat last IDE command after VM restart. > > Once again, this feature should be optional. > > Personally I would think it should be off by default. While that's a > holy war, I think it's clear that it needs to be configurable, > probably with a command-line option. > I don't want to participate in this particular holy war. But after the war is over can somebody (preferably maintainer) update be what the default should be? -- Gleb.