Bug 1163002 - Should add "Windows 2012R2 x64" as vm operating system options
Summary: Should add "Windows 2012R2 x64" as vm operating system options
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization Manager
Classification: Red Hat
Component: ovirt-engine
Version: 3.4.4
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ovirt-3.6.0-rc
: 3.6.0
Assignee: Shmuel Melamud
QA Contact: Nisim Simsolo
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2014-11-12 08:16 UTC by wanghui
Modified: 2016-04-20 01:36 UTC (History)
15 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2016-04-20 01:36:31 UTC
oVirt Team: Virt
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)
guest operating system options (3.81 MB, image/jpeg)
2014-11-12 08:16 UTC, wanghui
no flags Details


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
oVirt gerrit 39498 0 master MERGED webadmin: Added Windows 2012R2 x64 to the list of OSes Never

Description wanghui 2014-11-12 08:16:35 UTC
Created attachment 956615 [details]
guest operating system options

Description of problem:
It should add "Windows 2012R2 x64" as vm operating system options in RHEV-M 3.4.z according to Administration guide[1].

[1]http://documentation-devel.engineering.redhat.com/site/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Virtualization/3.4/html/Administration_Guide/Supported_virtual_machines.html

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization Manager Version: 3.4.4-1.4.el6ev

How reproducible:
100%

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Register rhev-hypervisor6-6.6-20141029.0.iso to rhevm3.4.
2. Create a vm and choose vm operating system.

Actual results:
1. After step2, there miss the "Windows 2012R2 x64" options as guest operating system.

Expected results:
1. It should provide the "Windows 2012R2 x64" options as guest operating system。

Additional info:

Comment 1 Omer Frenkel 2014-11-12 11:49:46 UTC
The documentation link lists the supported OS, but we don't have all of the different options to select in the UI, since there is no real configuration difference between win2012 & win2012r2 (same correct for 2003 and 2003r2)
there is no point to have different selections here.

on the 2008 case, there is configuration difference, so there is a specific selection for it.

suggesting to close as wont-fix as there is no point in adding this.
any objections?

Comment 2 Michal Skrivanek 2014-11-12 12:47:20 UTC
+1

maybe add "2012+" to the name?

Comment 3 Omer Frenkel 2014-11-18 07:34:22 UTC
i doubt someone will understand this
pushing to 3.6 for now

Comment 4 wanghui 2014-11-20 03:06:01 UTC
It's ok for me.

(In reply to Omer Frenkel from comment #1)
> The documentation link lists the supported OS, but we don't have all of the
> different options to select in the UI, since there is no real configuration
> difference between win2012 & win2012r2 (same correct for 2003 and 2003r2)
> there is no point to have different selections here.
> 
> on the 2008 case, there is configuration difference, so there is a specific
> selection for it.
> 
> suggesting to close as wont-fix as there is no point in adding this.
> any objections?

Comment 5 Scott Herold 2014-12-17 03:52:47 UTC
While this may not require different settings to build the underlying VM, it is technically considered a different Operating System by Microsoft and end users.  I'd recommend creating the entry for 2012R2 explicitly in 3.6.

Comment 6 Nisim Simsolo 2015-05-04 14:36:58 UTC
Fixed. Verified using 3.6.0-0.0.master.20150412172306.git55ba764.el6


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.