Taken from #864352: Description of problem: (In reply to bug #864352 comment #10) > Test version: > rhev-hypervisor6-6.4-20130116.3.0.el6 > ovirt-node-2.5.0-15.el6.noarch > > Steps: > 1.Install RHEV-H and register to RHN > 2.Run guest on top of RHEV-H host (prefer RHEL guest and configure network) > 3.check RHN virtual systems section. > 4.Then deleted the rhevh on RHN web side, and register rhevh to RHN again. > 5.check RHN virtual systems section. > > Result: > After step 3, check that the guest is listed under "Hosted Virtual Systems " > in rhn virtualization tab > But After step 5, Still check that info "No virtual systems." was shown on > RHN Web side. > > Also After register rhev-h to rhn, run rhn-profile-sync: > [root@localhost admin]# rhn-profile-sync > Updating package profile... > Updating hardware profile... > Updating virtualization profile... > An error has occurred: > <type 'exceptions.TypeError'> > See /var/log/up2date for more information > > [root@localhost admin]# cat /var/log/up2date > [Tue Jan 22 05:47:43 2013] up2date updateLoginInfo() login info > [Tue Jan 22 05:47:43 2013] up2date logging into up2date server > [Tue Jan 22 05:47:44 2013] up2date successfully retrieved authentication > token from up2date server > [Tue Jan 22 05:47:44 2013] up2date Updating package profile > [Tue Jan 22 05:47:51 2013] up2date > Traceback (most recent call last): > File "/usr/sbin/rhn-profile-sync", line 56, in <module> > cli.run() > File "/usr/share/rhn/up2date_client/rhncli.py", line 84, in run > File "/usr/sbin/rhn-profile-sync", line 51, in main > support.refresh(True) > File "/usr/share/rhn/virtualization/support.py", line 82, in refresh > <type 'exceptions.TypeError'>: poll_through_vdsm() takes exactly 1 argument > (0 given)
The /usr/share/rhn/virtualization/support.py is in rhn-virtualization-host, not rhn-client-tools, updating product and component. It looks like bf4e0a4736186ea5473b425e23e55bf0c3420003 missed the support.py code path.
Any reason the comment 0 is private?
Jan, (In reply to comment #3) > Any reason the comment 0 is private? nope - nothing to hide.
(In reply to comment #4) > > nope - nothing to hide. Flipping to public then.
Closing as duplicate of 907847. I know this one was filed first, but I just cloned the other one to spacewalk and it has a customer case. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 907847 ***