On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 11:23:09AM -0600, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 04/15/2013 11:04 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 12:49:12PM -0400, John Ferlan wrote:
> >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=906644
> >>
> >> Added checks to both virsh suspend and virsh resume for
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 12:49:12PM -0400, John Ferlan wrote:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=906644
>
> Added checks to both virsh suspend and virsh resume for the domain to be
> in a the right state before trying the suspend/resume. Similar checks to
> examples/domsuspend/suspend.c.
On 04/15/2013 11:04 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 12:49:12PM -0400, John Ferlan wrote:
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=906644
>>
>> Added checks to both virsh suspend and virsh resume for the domain to be
>> in a the right state before trying the suspend/res
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=906644
Added checks to both virsh suspend and virsh resume for the domain to be
in a the right state before trying the suspend/resume. Similar checks to
examples/domsuspend/suspend.c.
Although not stated in case, any thoughts on adding a --force for bot