Eric Blake writes:
> On 01/22/2013 08:52 AM, Amos Kong wrote:
>
Libvirt will need to expose an attribute that lets the user control
whether to use this new option; how do we probe via QMP whether the
new
-boot strict=on command-line option is available?
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>
On 01/22/2013 08:52 AM, Amos Kong wrote:
>>>
>>> Libvirt will need to expose an attribute that lets the user control
>>> whether to use this new option; how do we probe via QMP whether the
>>> new
>>> -boot strict=on command-line option is available?
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> How about add new info/quer
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 10:23:32AM -0500, Amos Kong wrote:
> - Original Message -
> > On 01/09/2013 01:39 AM, Amos Kong wrote:
> > > Current seabios will try to boot from selected devices first,
> > > if they are all failed, seabios will also try to boot from
> > > un-selected devices.
> >
- Original Message -
> On 01/09/2013 01:39 AM, Amos Kong wrote:
> > Current seabios will try to boot from selected devices first,
> > if they are all failed, seabios will also try to boot from
> > un-selected devices.
> >
> > We need to make it configurable. I already posted a seabios
> >
On Wed, Jan 09, 2013 at 18:02:22 +, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 09, 2013 at 12:36:52PM -0500, Laine Stump wrote:
> >
> > Just a note about this: as far as I can tell virt-manager currently only
> > uses the "old style" of specifying boot order; it needs to be enhanced
> > to recogn
On 01/09/2013 01:02 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 09, 2013 at 12:36:52PM -0500, Laine Stump wrote:
>> On 01/09/2013 10:52 AM, Amos Kong wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jan 09, 2013 at 08:14:07AM -0700, Eric Blake wrote:
On 01/09/2013 01:39 AM, Amos Kong wrote:
> Current seabios will try t
On Wed, Jan 09, 2013 at 12:36:52PM -0500, Laine Stump wrote:
> On 01/09/2013 10:52 AM, Amos Kong wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 09, 2013 at 08:14:07AM -0700, Eric Blake wrote:
> >> On 01/09/2013 01:39 AM, Amos Kong wrote:
> >>> Current seabios will try to boot from selected devices first,
> >>> if they are
On Wed, Jan 09, 2013 at 12:28:57PM -0500, Laine Stump wrote:
> On 01/09/2013 10:22 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 09, 2013 at 08:14:07AM -0700, Eric Blake wrote:
> >> On 01/09/2013 01:39 AM, Amos Kong wrote:
> >>> Current seabios will try to boot from selected devices first,
> >>> if
On 01/09/2013 10:52 AM, Amos Kong wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 09, 2013 at 08:14:07AM -0700, Eric Blake wrote:
>> On 01/09/2013 01:39 AM, Amos Kong wrote:
>>> Current seabios will try to boot from selected devices first,
>>> if they are all failed, seabios will also try to boot from
>>> un-selected devices
On 01/09/2013 10:22 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 09, 2013 at 08:14:07AM -0700, Eric Blake wrote:
>> On 01/09/2013 01:39 AM, Amos Kong wrote:
>>> Current seabios will try to boot from selected devices first,
>>> if they are all failed, seabios will also try to boot from
>>> un-selecte
On Wed, Jan 09, 2013 at 08:14:07AM -0700, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 01/09/2013 01:39 AM, Amos Kong wrote:
> > Current seabios will try to boot from selected devices first,
> > if they are all failed, seabios will also try to boot from
> > un-selected devices.
> >
> > We need to make it configurable.
On Wed, Jan 09, 2013 at 08:14:07AM -0700, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 01/09/2013 01:39 AM, Amos Kong wrote:
> > Current seabios will try to boot from selected devices first,
> > if they are all failed, seabios will also try to boot from
> > un-selected devices.
> >
> > We need to make it configurable.
On 01/09/2013 01:39 AM, Amos Kong wrote:
> Current seabios will try to boot from selected devices first,
> if they are all failed, seabios will also try to boot from
> un-selected devices.
>
> We need to make it configurable. I already posted a seabios
> patch to add a new device type to halt boot
13 matches
Mail list logo
