On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 04:18:48PM -0500, Laine Stump wrote:
> On 03/05/2010 05:11 AM, Daniel Veillard wrote:
> >@@ -8343,6 +8399,17 @@ vshCommandRun(vshControl *ctl, const vshCmd *cmd)
> > if (ret == FALSE)
> > virshReportError(ctl);
> >
> >+/* try to catch automatica
On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 03:33:10PM -0500, Laine Stump wrote:
> I applied this patch and tried it out. It appears to work as
> advertised, which is useful. Would be even better if there was some
> higher level handling to automatically retry the commands that fail
> due to sigpipe.
>
> Beyond that,
On 03/05/2010 05:11 AM, Daniel Veillard wrote:
@@ -8343,6 +8399,17 @@ vshCommandRun(vshControl *ctl, const vshCmd *cmd)
if (ret == FALSE)
virshReportError(ctl);
+/* try to catch automatically disconnections */
+if ((ret == FALSE)&&
Also, there's a tr
I applied this patch and tried it out. It appears to work as advertised,
which is useful. Would be even better if there was some higher level
handling to automatically retry the commands that fail due to sigpipe.
Beyond that, I noticed a few typos, but don't have enough expertise
about signals
This is a usability issue for virsh in case of disconnections,
for example if the remote libvirtd is restarted:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=526656
the patch catch those and tries to automatically reconnect instead
of virsh exitting. The typical interaction with this patch is th
