Bug 1513839 - [RFE] virt-v2v support for RHEL Atomic
Summary: [RFE] virt-v2v support for RHEL Atomic
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED WONTFIX
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux Advanced Virtualization
Classification: Red Hat
Component: libguestfs
Version: ---
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
unspecified
low
Target Milestone: pre-dev-freeze
: ---
Assignee: Libvirt Maintainers
QA Contact: Virtualization Bugs
URL:
Whiteboard: V2V
Depends On: 1102241
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2017-11-16 05:13 UTC by Brett Thurber
Modified: 2022-03-13 15:11 UTC (History)
9 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2019-08-29 15:36:41 UTC
Type: Feature Request
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Attachments (Terms of Use)


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
Red Hat Issue Tracker RHELPLAN-20470 0 None None None 2022-03-13 15:11:08 UTC

Description Brett Thurber 2017-11-16 05:13:40 UTC 
Description of problem:
virt-v2v doesn't support RHEL Atomic as a recognized OS.  This is needed when migrating RHEL Atomic VM's from 3rd part virt providers such as VMware.


Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
virt-v2v-1.37.31-1.fc27.x86_64

How reproducible:
Every time.

Steps to Reproduce:
1.  Use virt-v2v in F27 to try and migrate a RHEL Atomic VM from VMware
2.
3.

Actual results:
Fails to recognize RHEL Atomic as a supported OS.

Expected results:
Successfully recognizes RHEL Atomic as a supported OS and able to convert/migrate VM.

Additional info:
Comment 4 Jaroslav Suchanek 2019-08-29 14:45:25 UTC 
Is it still valid requirement?
Comment 5 Brett Thurber 2019-08-29 15:25:54 UTC 
(In reply to Jaroslav Suchanek from comment #4)
> Is it still valid requirement?

We haven't seen any requests so far.  I think it is safe to close for now and we can revisit later if needed.
Comment 6 Jaroslav Suchanek 2019-08-29 15:36:41 UTC 
(In reply to Brett Thurber from comment #5)
> (In reply to Jaroslav Suchanek from comment #4)
> > Is it still valid requirement?
> 
> We haven't seen any requests so far.  I think it is safe to close for now
> and we can revisit later if needed.

Thanks for prompt reply. Closing for now.
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.