|Summary:||[Virtual Machines] [UI] - Can't import vm from export domain, engine report that there is no active export domain, although there is|
|Product:||[oVirt] ovirt-engine||Reporter:||Michael Burman <mburman>|
|Component:||BLL.Virt||Assignee:||Michal Skrivanek <michal.skrivanek>|
|Status:||CLOSED DUPLICATE||QA Contact:||meital avital <mavital>|
|Version:||4.0.0||CC:||amureini, bugs, gklein, mburman, mgoldboi, ylavi|
|Fixed In Version:||Doc Type:||If docs needed, set a value|
|Doc Text:||Story Points:||---|
|Last Closed:||2016-07-28 07:58:58 UTC||Type:||Bug|
|oVirt Team:||Virt||RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:|
|Cloudforms Team:||---||Target Upstream Version:|
Description Michael Burman 2016-07-25 09:20:05 UTC
Description of problem: Can't import vm from export domain, engine report that there is no active export domain, although there is. - Via the Virtual Machines main tab > 'Import' - engine report there is no active export domain although there is an active one in the setup. - Via the 'Storage' main tab > 'Import' from export domain, i can see the vm and import it with success. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): 4.0.2-0.1.rc.el7ev How reproducible: 100 Steps to Reproduce: 1. Try to import vm from export domain via the 'Virtual Machines' main tab Actual results: Can't import vm because engine report there is no active storage domain in the setup. Expected results: Should work as expected.
Comment 1 Michael Burman 2016-07-25 09:25:57 UTC
If we will switch the source to VMware for example and then back to Export Domain, we will see that the 'Load' button is no longer grayed out and we will be able to load and import the vm.
Comment 3 Michael Burman 2016-07-25 11:00:20 UTC
No. The bug is that you don't have any active export domain although you have. Comment 1^^, is just a work around.
Comment 6 Michal Skrivanek 2016-07-25 11:26:54 UTC
sorry, i've meant a different bug - it is duplicate of bug 1340025 Since when this is a regression?
Comment 7 Michael Burman 2016-07-25 11:35:12 UTC
(In reply to Michal Skrivanek from comment #6) > sorry, i've meant a different bug - it is duplicate of bug 1340025 > Since when this is a regression? I guess that yes, seems like it's the same. I don't know since when, but this is defiantly worked on previous versions. And btw, i see that this bug is appears to be on 126.96.36.199-0.1.el6 as well.
Comment 8 Michal Skrivanek 2016-07-25 12:08:07 UTC
(In reply to Michael Burman from comment #7) > (In reply to Michal Skrivanek from comment #6) > > sorry, i've meant a different bug - it is duplicate of bug 1340025 > > Since when this is a regression? > > I guess that yes, seems like it's the same. > I don't know since when, but this is defiantly worked on previous versions. > > And btw, i see that this bug is appears to be on 188.8.131.52-0.1.el6 as well. yes, and i reproduced it in 3.6.7 as well, hence I'm asking since when this is a regression, because it seems to me it's not. I suggest to drop the Regression kw and not block 4.0
Comment 9 Michael Burman 2016-07-25 13:10:33 UTC
I really don't know since when, i'm not testing this on daily basis, but it worked for sure on previous versions, so i guess it is a regression, but no idea since when. About blocking 4.0 maybe you are right, but it's not me to decide..) Yaniv, Gil ?