Re: recommendations for handling Hyper-V version number

> On Sep 25, 2020, at 4:42 AM, Daniel P. Berrangé <berrange(a)redhat.com <mailto:berrange@redhat.com>> wrote: > > IOW we could stuff both the hyper-v major + minor version digits > into the libvirt major digits. Then we can split the hyperv micro > digits across the libvirt minor + micro. > > ie pack it using > > version = (major * 100,000,000) + (minor * 1,000,000) + micro > > If any libvrt apps are trying to reverse parse this and turn it > back into dotted values, it is going to look wierd, but at least > we won't be discarding information. I wrote this up and examined the `virsh version` output for several Windows/Hyper-V versions. For Windows Server 2016 that I previously mentioned, its version number is 10.0.14393. `virsh version` displays it as 1000.14.393. The first version of Windows that supported Hyper-V is Windows Server 2008. Its version number is 6.0.6001, which `virsh version` displays as 600.6.1. Would you prefer it to visually preserve more of the “6001”, and produce 600.600.1 as the result?