[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [virt-tools-list] [virt-manager][PATCH ] Add option to control whether to leave VM running when closing console.



On Tue, Jul 02, 2013 at 11:45:48AM -0300, Leonardo Augusto GuimarĂ£es Garcia wrote:
> On 07/01/2013 03:18 PM, Cole Robinson wrote:
> >On 06/28/2013 01:49 PM, Leonardo Garcia wrote:
> >>From: Leonardo Garcia <lagarcia br ibm com>
> >>
> >>It is sometimes counter intuitive for a desktop user that the virtual machine
> >>continues to run when they left the console viewer application. They are used
> >>that when they close an application all the resources being used by it are also
> >>freed up, and from their perspective, the console viewer is just one more
> >>application running.
> >Hmm, I don't know if I buy this. Closing a VNC client window doesn't shut down
> >the remote machine, nor does exiting an SSH connection.
> Yes, but in these cases the user is probably accessing a remote
> machine, so machine resource utilization is generally not a concern
> of the user. The general desktop user whose necessity I am trying to
> address is just accessing VMs on their own personal system. And,
> unfortunately, they usually get upset by the fact that even though
> they are not using the VM, it is still consuming the machine
> resources.
> >  And doing virt-manager
> >--uuid <blah> doesn't auto-start an inactive VM so users are forced to
> >recognize this concept IMO.
> Well, that would be my next patch. :)
> 
> Actually I was thinking to contribute a similar option to autostart
> the VM when the console is opened and the VM is not running. I was
> just thinking whether I should use the same option or another one to
> do that.

A very significant portion of virt-manager users will not want that
kind of behaviour, even for local VMs. Which means you'll end up having
to add yet another checkbox preference to turn this off & on, then
people will still argue about whether it should default to on or off.

Again the user interaction model you're describing here is one that
is satisfied by GNOME Boxes.

It isn't clear to me that we want to give virt-manager a split
personality where it works one way for remote VMs, and then tries
to emulate Boxes when using local VMs, which is what your proposals
pretty much imply.

Daniel
-- 
|: http://berrange.com      -o-    http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org              -o-             http://virt-manager.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org       -o-         http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: http://entangle-photo.org       -o-       http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]