Note: This bug is displayed in read-only format because the product is no longer active in Red Hat Bugzilla.

Bug 1384060

Summary: [RHV][doc] install RHEV-H legacy in RHV 4 in not supported
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization Manager Reporter: Olimp Bockowski <obockows>
Component: DocumentationAssignee: rhev-docs <rhev-docs>
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE QA Contact: rhev-docs <rhev-docs>
Severity: unspecified Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: 4.0.0CC: cshao, dguo, fdeutsch, gklein, huzhao, jiawu, leiwang, lsurette, pstehlik, qiyuan, rbalakri, rbarry, sbonazzo, srevivo, weiwang, yaniwang, ycui, ykaul, ylavi, yzhao
Target Milestone: ovirt-4.1.1Keywords: ZStream
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2017-02-14 13:00:23 UTC Type: Bug
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: Docs RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Olimp Bockowski 2016-10-12 12:49:04 UTC 
Description of problem:
install RHEV-H legacy in RHV 4

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
RHV 4.0.0+

How reproducible:
Try to add RHEV-H in RHV 4 environment

Actual results:
It is not supported. However it could be misleading because after an upgrade from RHEV 3.6 you can have RHEV-H in RHV 4 env. But no way to add new RHEV-H.
Details in KCS: https://access.redhat.com/solutions/2695511

Expected results:
In installation guide it would be nice to have some warning that installation RHEV-H in new RHV 4 environment is not supported and not possible to work without any problems.
Comment 1 Yaniv Lavi 2017-01-31 08:36:56 UTC 
Don't we want to have a nice error in the UI? It doesn't make sense to me to add it to docs and have users get a ugly exception.
Comment 2 Sandro Bonazzola 2017-02-14 13:00:23 UTC 
(In reply to Yaniv Dary from comment #1)
> Don't we want to have a nice error in the UI? It doesn't make sense to me to
> add it to docs and have users get a ugly exception.

As far as I know, the engine already report correctly something like:
"Failed to install Host ${hostname}. Failed to execute stage 'Transaction commit': Command '/sbin/grubby' failed to execute."

Marking as duplicate of bug #1412906

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1412906 ***