Bug 864033
Summary: | Installer shouldn't proceed while there are other instances runnin | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization Manager | Reporter: | Tomas Jamrisko <tjamrisk> |
Component: | mingw-virt-viewer | Assignee: | Marc-Andre Lureau <marcandre.lureau> |
Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | Desktop QE <desktop-qa-list> |
Severity: | unspecified | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | unspecified | ||
Version: | 3.1.0 | CC: | aburden, acathrow, cfergeau, dblechte, djasa, mbarta, mkrcmari, pvine |
Target Milestone: | --- | ||
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
OS: | Unspecified | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | mingw-virt-viewer-0.5.3-12.el6 | Doc Type: | Bug Fix |
Doc Text: |
Previous versions of mingw-virt-viewer installer would not recognize if another instance of remote/virt-viewer was running, resulting in a failure to update certain files. The installer now displays a warning that another instance of either virt-viewer or remote-viewer is running and prevents the installation from continuing.
|
Story Points: | --- |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2012-12-04 17:59:06 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: | 872541 | ||
Bug Blocks: |
Description
Tomas Jamrisko
2012-10-08 12:04:14 UTC
This is actually quite complicated to handle, unfortunately. Let's add a warning and error out if there is already a running instance of either virt-viewer, remote-viewer or the installer itself. However potentially, any of the other files may be in use, by any other application, at any tiem, and it's seems really hard to prevent that, so there is some chance it still fails. Using the same kernel mutex should solve at least the common case. sent a patch series to virt-tools ML for a possible solution This bug actually depends on bug 872541, the use case being: There are two users connected at the same time, first has IE with activex loaded or r-v running and second wants to "install for all users": the installation shouldn't proceed in this scenario either (IMHO no matter if the running instance is "per-user" or "all users" one). (In reply to comment #5) > This bug actually depends on bug 872541, the use case being: > There are two users connected at the same time, first has IE with activex > loaded or r-v running and second wants to "install for all users": the > installation shouldn't proceed in this scenario either (IMHO no matter if > the running instance is "per-user" or "all users" one). I don't think we should mix activex / cab single-user use case with msi / admin use case. You are asking too much at the same time. We have like 3 different ways (at least) to install virt-viewer, we should solve problems one by one. Please consider removing the blocker. (In reply to comment #6) > (In reply to comment #5) > > This bug actually depends on bug 872541, the use case being: > > > There are two users connected at the same time, first has IE with activex > > loaded or r-v running and second wants to "install for all users": the > > installation shouldn't proceed in this scenario either (IMHO no matter if > > the running instance is "per-user" or "all users" one). > > I don't think we should mix activex / cab single-user use case with msi / > admin use case. You are asking too much at the same time. We have like 3 > different ways (at least) to install virt-viewer, we should solve problems > one by one. Please consider removing the blocker. Ok, We will verify this bug for one user case. The use case of two users when one of them has activex loaded and virt-viewer running works for me - the other user can install activex/virt-viewer and run it without problems. 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/RHEA-2012-1525.html |