|Summary:||[RFE][Tracker] - local user editable config file/registry settings to hard code the guest monitors on to the client monitors|
|Product:||Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization Manager||Reporter:||Mark Huth <mhuth>|
|Component:||RFEs||Assignee:||Scott Herold <sherold>|
|Status:||CLOSED ERRATA||QA Contact:||SPICE QE bug list <spice-qe-bugs>|
|Version:||unspecified||CC:||aburden, cfergeau, dblechte, djasa, iheim, jjongsma, joallen, khuynh, lpeer, rbalakri, sherold, tpelka, ylavi|
|Fixed In Version:||Doc Type:||Enhancement|
In multiple-monitor setups, it is now possible to specify which monitors are to be used by a virtual guest, and which are to be reserved for the local machine. This is done by editing the ~/.config/virt-viewer/settings file.
|Last Closed:||2016-03-09 20:31:01 UTC||Type:||Bug|
|oVirt Team:||Spice||RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:|
|Cloudforms Team:||---||Target Upstream Version:|
|Bug Depends On:||1129477, 1129479, 1181289, 1233422|
Description Mark Huth 2013-04-29 06:40:15 UTC
Description of problem: remote-viewer should have a local user editable config file/registry settings to hard code the guest monitors on to the client monitors. For example, our VDI users have 3 monitors (1 x 19" and 2 x 24") and they want their VM to put its screens on the 24" monitors. We should be able to tell remote-view that it should use physical monitor X for the first guest screen, monitor Y for the second guest screen and so on.
Comment 1 Marc-Andre Lureau 2013-04-29 10:06:21 UTC
(In reply to comment #0) > Description of problem: > remote-viewer should have a local user editable config file/registry > settings to hard code the guest monitors on to the client monitors. For > example, our VDI users have 3 monitors (1 x 19" and 2 x 24") and they want > their VM to put its screens on the 24" monitors. We should be able to tell > remote-view that it should use physical monitor X for the first guest > screen, monitor Y for the second guest screen and so on. Could you explain why mapping the guest configuration to match client configuration isn't suitable? Do I understand correctly you are asking for the guest to be configured with 2 monitors shown on monitor 2 & 3 of the client? Should this setting be per client/guest configuration? per client only? per guest only? any combination? Should it be configurable from RHEVM instead? This brings a lot of questions on how to provide such feature, when you can just place the client monitor windows manually, like any other application.
Comment 2 Christophe Fergeau 2013-04-29 11:06:39 UTC
For what it's worth, devil's pie may be able to do this kind of positioning.
Comment 3 Marc-Andre Lureau 2013-04-30 11:04:36 UTC
(In reply to comment #2) > For what it's worth, devil's pie may be able to do this kind of positioning. only on RHEL
Comment 4 Marc-Andre Lureau 2013-05-17 12:45:42 UTC
*** Bug 957595 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 17 Scott Herold 2014-10-23 16:05:06 UTC
Flagging for discussion for 3.6 prioritization in Spice
Comment 18 Leo Liu 2014-11-07 23:53:43 UTC
(In reply to Scott Herold from comment #17) > Flagging for discussion for 3.6 prioritization in Spice Hello Scott, Any update about this request for 3.6? Thanks!
Comment 26 Yaniv Lavi 2015-06-30 11:42:38 UTC
This should be in MODIFIED, right? Since the rebase of virt-viewer will include this?
Comment 27 David Blechter 2015-06-30 11:50:40 UTC
(In reply to Yaniv Dary from comment #26) > This should be in MODIFIED, right? Since the rebase of virt-viewer will > include this? I consider it as the tracker bug, no place in errata. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1233422 is ON_QA
Comment 28 Yaniv Lavi 2015-06-30 12:02:06 UTC
(In reply to David Blechter from comment #27) > (In reply to Yaniv Dary from comment #26) > > This should be in MODIFIED, right? Since the rebase of virt-viewer will > > include this? > > I consider it as the tracker bug, no place in errata. > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1233422 is ON_QA Changing this to bug tracker then.
Comment 29 Yaniv Lavi 2015-08-27 14:07:55 UTC
Should this be on_qa?
Comment 30 Yaniv Lavi 2015-08-27 14:09:27 UTC
I understand it is a tracker, but if the dependent bugs are ON_QA this should be on qa.
Comment 33 errata-xmlrpc 2016-03-09 20:31:01 UTC
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. https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHEA-2016-0376.html