On 04/20/2016 08:48 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 08:40:16AM -0400, Cole Robinson wrote:
> On 04/20/2016 08:10 AM, John Ferlan wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 04/15/2016 05:21 PM, Cole Robinson wrote:
>>> I don't think we need to try and support qcow-create or kvm-img
>>> binaries anymore; everywhere we care about should have a
>>> /usr/bin/qemu-img. See patches for more details
>>>
>>> Cole Robinson (3):
>>> storage: remove support for /usr/bin/qcow-create
>>> storage: remove support for /usr/bin/kvm-img
>>> storage: drop the plumbing needed for kvm-img/qcow-create
>>>
>>> src/qemu/qemu_domain.c | 2 +-
>>> src/qemu/qemu_driver.c | 4 +-
>>> src/storage/storage_backend.c | 131
++-------------------------------------
>>> src/storage/storage_backend.h | 9 ++-
>>> src/storage/storage_backend_fs.c | 21 ++-----
>>> src/util/virfile.c | 2 +-
>>> tests/virstoragetest.c | 4 +-
>>> 7 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 155 deletions(-)
>>>
>>
>> ACK series in general (see my note in 3/3)... I always wondered about
>> the history of this code as I was trudging through it for buildVol.
>>
>> Your call on how long you want to wait to see if anyone comes back with
>> the "no we cannot remove this because" type response (of course
there's
>> always git revert!
>>
>
> Dan probably has the most context on the history here, CCd for his opinion
> (see patch #1 and #2 for what I could drum up on qcow-create and kvm-img
> relevancy)
ACK, its fine.
Thanks, pushed with John's patch #3 suggestion
- Cole