On 11/28/2013 01:56 AM, Amos Kong wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 02:37:02PM +0200, Laine Stump wrote:
>> Awhile back a bug was filed against libvirt about the inability to completely
>> exclude a disk from the boot order:
>>
>>https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=888635
>>
>> In short,
On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 02:37:02PM +0200, Laine Stump wrote:
> Awhile back a bug was filed against libvirt about the inability to completely
> exclude a disk from the boot order:
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=888635
>
> In short, you can't have a domain that used PXE to boot,
On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 02:37:02PM +0200, Laine Stump wrote:
> Awhile back a bug was filed against libvirt about the inability to
> completely exclude a disk from the boot order:
>
>https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=888635
>
> In short, you can't have a domain that used PXE to boot,
On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 14:37:02 +0200, Laine Stump wrote:
> Awhile back a bug was filed against libvirt about the inability to
> completely exclude a disk from the boot order:
>
>https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=888635
>
> In short, you can't have a domain that used PXE to boot, b
Awhile back a bug was filed against libvirt about the inability to
completely exclude a disk from the boot order:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=888635
In short, you can't have a domain that used PXE to boot, but also has an
un-bootable disk device *even if that disk isn't listed