On 06/29/2016 03:34 AM, Erik Skultety wrote:
On 27/06/16 20:28, Cole Robinson wrote:
> Similar to what virsh and virt-login-shell do
>
>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350315
> ---
> I can't actually reproduce the bug, the backtrace is similar to
> 97973ebb7 which added the same fix for virt-login-shell, and
> that commit also mentions the randomness of reproducing...
>
> tools/virt-admin.c | 5 +++++
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/tools/virt-admin.c b/tools/virt-admin.c
> index 4acac65..7bff5c3 100644
> --- a/tools/virt-admin.c
> +++ b/tools/virt-admin.c
> @@ -1371,6 +1371,11 @@ main(int argc, char **argv)
> return EXIT_FAILURE;
> }
>
> + if (virInitialize() < 0) {
> + vshError(ctl, "%s", _("Failed to initialize libvirt"));
> + return EXIT_FAILURE;
> + }
> +
> virFileActivateDirOverride(argv[0]);
>
> if (!vshInit(ctl, cmdGroups, NULL))
>
So, based on Luyao's feedback on the modified patch I attached to
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350315, ACK if you replace
virInitialize call with virAdmInitialize (do not forget to export the
symbol through public syms :)...). I keep wondering though, why none of
I'll just give my ACK to your patch instead :) Please push that
us (you, me, and Martin) was able to reproduce it even once.
Yeah there's definitely some weirdness... see the commit message for the
similar virt-login-shell change, which one day just randomly started breaking
- Cole