Bug 824253
Summary: | manpage: document limitations on identifying domains with numeric names | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 | Reporter: | dyuan |
Component: | libvirt | Assignee: | Gunannan Ren <gren> |
Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | Virtualization Bugs <virt-bugs> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | 6.3 | CC: | acathrow, berrange, bili, dallan, dyasny, jdenemar, lnovich, mzhan, pkrempa, pschiffe, rwu |
Target Milestone: | rc | Keywords: | FutureFeature |
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
OS: | Unspecified | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | libvirt-0.10.2-10.el6 | Doc Type: | Enhancement |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2013-02-21 07:15:21 UTC | Type: | Bug |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: | |||
Bug Depends On: | |||
Bug Blocks: | 851047, 881827 |
Description
dyuan
2012-05-23 05:23:20 UTC
This is a known limitation of virsh, which we can't do anything about. If you have named your guests soley using numeric digits, then you can only use ID numbers or UUID to refer to them unambiguously. We should document this limitation in the man page if it isn't already present. commit 13c69cd0b446669dc53417cb5207c51167a9c14f Author: Dave Allan <dallan> Date: Mon Oct 1 14:01:36 2012 -0400 Add note about numeric domain names to manpage Clarify that domains with numeric names can only be identified by their domain id. The last rebase to libvirt-0.10.2 was completed and all patches need to be explicitly backported and sent to rhvirt-patches for review. Please, set bugs to POST only after sending the backported patches. Guannan, does 13c69cd0b446669dc53417cb5207c51167a9c14f backport cleanly? Patch sent out today http://post-office.corp.redhat.com/archives/rhvirt-patches/2012-November/msg00204.html Verified this bug in libvirt-0.10.2-10.el6: # man virsh: .... The basic structure of most virsh usage is: virsh [OPTION]... <command> <domain> [ARG]... Where command is one of the commands listed below; domain is the numeric domain id, or the domain name, or the domain UUID; and ARGS are command specific options. There are a few exceptions to this rule in the cases where the command in question acts on all domains, the entire machine, or directly on the xen hypervisor. Those exceptions will be clear for each of those commands. Note: it is permissible to give numeric names to domains, however, doing so will result in a domain that can only be identified by domain id. In other words, if a numeric value is supplied it will be interpreted as a domain id, not as a name. The virsh program can be used either to run one COMMAND by giving the command and its arguments on the shell command line, or a COMMAND_STRING which is a single shell argument consisting of multiple COMMAND .... And can reproduce it with libvirt-0.2-10.9.el6: # man virsh ... The basic structure of most virsh usage is: virsh [OPTION]... <command> <domain> [ARG]... Where command is one of the commands listed below, domain is the numeric domain id, or the domain name, or the domain UUID and ARGS are command specific options. There are a few exceptions to this rule in the cases where the command in question acts on all domains, the entire machine, or directly on the xen hypervisor. Those exceptions will be clear for each of those commands. The virsh program can be used either to run one COMMAND by giving the command and its arguments on the shell command line, or a COMMAND_STRING which is a single shell argument consisting of multiple COMMAND ... So changing to VERIFIED. Since the problem described in this bug report should be resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated files, follow the link below. If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report. http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2013-0276.html |