Bug 616346
Summary: | libvirt doesn't allow me to run RHEL5 guest on RHEL-6 host | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 | Reporter: | Matěj Cepl <mcepl> |
Component: | qemu-kvm | Assignee: | Virtualization Maintenance <virt-maint> |
Status: | CLOSED NOTABUG | QA Contact: | Virtualization Bugs <virt-bugs> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | low | ||
Version: | 6.1 | CC: | amit.shah, berrange, eblake, mkenneth, virt-maint, xen-maint |
Target Milestone: | rc | Keywords: | RHELNAK |
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2010-07-20 12:34:26 UTC | Type: | --- |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: |
Description
Matěj Cepl
2010-07-20 08:33:25 UTC
RHEL-4 guest starts without a problem. When I changed via virsh edit tikanga line <type arch='x86_64' machine='pc-0.12'>hvm</type> to <type arch='x86_64' machine='pc'>hvm</type> guest starts again. Is this a regression or wasn't this supposed to work all the time and it was just a mistake that it did? This issue has been proposed when we are only considering blocker issues in the current Red Hat Enterprise Linux release. ** If you would still like this issue considered for the current release, ask your support representative to file as a blocker on your behalf. Otherwise ask that it be considered for the next Red Hat Enterprise Linux release. ** libvirt should've selected a rhel-5 machine type for your installation. Using pc-0.12 was wrong; was this guest installed a while ago? Earlier version of RHEL6 kvm still included the 'pc-0.12' machine type. This was recently disabled - kvm-Disable-non-rhel-machine-types-pc-0.12-pc-0.11-pc-0..patch [bz#607263] Hence any guests which happened to have that wouldn't work. IMHO this is NOTABUG. Closed per comment #6 |