From aa9c5e0f10677786c7bb9a3d45844fa0c6bbf06b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Joey Hess Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2018 13:05:03 -0400 Subject: feedback --- ...ent_8_f7ceb2909d6884a9b13500b7c660469a._comment | 23 ++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+) create mode 100644 doc/todo/support_for_libvirt_KVM_VMs/comment_8_f7ceb2909d6884a9b13500b7c660469a._comment (limited to 'doc') diff --git a/doc/todo/support_for_libvirt_KVM_VMs/comment_8_f7ceb2909d6884a9b13500b7c660469a._comment b/doc/todo/support_for_libvirt_KVM_VMs/comment_8_f7ceb2909d6884a9b13500b7c660469a._comment new file mode 100644 index 00000000..0af0baaa --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/todo/support_for_libvirt_KVM_VMs/comment_8_f7ceb2909d6884a9b13500b7c660469a._comment @@ -0,0 +1,23 @@ +[[!comment format=mdwn + username="joey" + subject="""comment 8""" + date="2018-11-05T16:40:57Z" + content=""" +Seems that kvmRunning would need a warning that changes to the propellor +configuration of the VM's Host won't affect the VM. Because it's unusual for +propellor to only be able to set something up and not change it afterwards. + +But kvmRunning is certianly a useful low level property, and combining with +other properties like that is good. + +Hmm, it's actually possible to mount a qcow2 image using libguestfs-tools. + +So, propellor could temporarily take down the VM and run inside the qcow2 +to update it! Although doing that every time propellor is run seems +suboptimal. It could keep the chroot around and only update the qcow2 image +if the chroot needed to be updated. I am not sure how I feel about that +idea. + +We could also make conducting easier to set up, perhaps not needing `main` +to be modified to use it. +"""]] -- cgit v1.2.3