What | Removed | Added |
---|---|---|
Status | REOPENED | RESOLVED |
Resolution | --- | FIXED |
(In reply to James Fehlig from comment #90) > [���] It was a long and twisted road but I think you just discovered the reason > for the regression!! Do you happen to know if [the issue] first appeared after the > switch to NM was made? I guess we had a case of overlapping issues. After all, there were fixes intended for this bug here. I guess we can't find out all details from the historical development easily anymore. > > So maybe the solution would be that actually > > yast2-vm needs to learn to create a bridge using NetworkManager now? > > Charles might have investigated that in the past, but he just confirmed via > RC that yast2-vm currently "checks for NM and pops up a message saying you > have to configure a bridge manually". That's good to know. I would like to understand why our test also does not show this e.g. in https://openqa.opensuse.org/tests/1231572#step/yast_virtualization/13 . But I guess we can settle the issue by adjusting the test case accordingly to cover at best *both* parts, one based on wicked and one based on NM. So we should check the behaviour in both hence I created ticket https://progress.opensuse.org/issues/65552 and will set this bug back to the status RESOLVED FIXED. > > If all > > of this is considered out of scope at the very least I suggest to extend the > > documentation in > > https://doc.opensuse.org/documentation/leap/virtualization/single-html/book. > > virt/#sec-vt-installation-kvm to not say "YaST offers to automatically > > configure a bridge on the VM Host Server." but for example mention that this > > only applies for wicked managed systems. > > I guess the openSUSE doc is derived from the SLES doc, where we don't > mention it since NM is not the default in SLES. If it is not possible to > make yast2-vm work with NM, then I agree we'll need to mention it in the doc. I think if there is the popup dialog informing about NetworkManager needing manual action then the documentation is also "correct" and can be considered sufficient as is :)