From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MtVIb-0000DL-1v for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 01 Oct 2009 19:43:01 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MtVIW-0000Ah-EA for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 01 Oct 2009 19:43:00 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=39266 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MtVIW-0000Ad-3D for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 01 Oct 2009 19:42:56 -0400 Received: from mail2.shareable.org ([80.68.89.115]:38390) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MtVIV-0000Ht-Hr for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 01 Oct 2009 19:42:55 -0400 Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 00:42:52 +0100 From: Jamie Lokier Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] qemu-img needs "-O host_device" describing Message-ID: <20091001234252.GB28250@shareable.org> References: <20090930212736.GA17077@ash.smop.co.uk> <4AC47CEE.1000405@redhat.com> <20091001104842.GA18687@ash.smop.co.uk> <4AC49B77.1020004@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4AC49B77.1020004@redhat.com> List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Kevin Wolf Cc: adrian@smop.co.uk, qemu-devel@nongnu.org Kevin Wolf wrote: > Am 01.10.2009 12:48, schrieb Adrian Bridgett: > > I do wonder if -O raw should warn when > > run against output devices which aren't regular files though. > > I'd consider an error message pointing to host_device helpful (error > meaning that qemu-img aborts, not just a warning). So if you like to add > the check, go ahead. Why not simply provide the host_device behaviour when -O raw is used on a device? Is there anything to be gained from not doing so? -- Jamie