Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

x86_64: Cleanup xenmgr_vm interface #33

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Conversation

crogers1
Copy link
Contributor

@crogers1 crogers1 commented Mar 13, 2019

The VM interface actually duplicates almost every property and method.
com.citrix.xenclient.xenmgr.vm and
com.citrix.xenclient.xenmgr.vm.unrestricted

The properties being removed have are from the unrestricted interface
and have no backend implementation in Xenmgr. Therefore, extra code
is being autogenerated that doesn't need to be. Also we shouldn't
advertise functions that don't actually exist.

One property is higher up in the file to match where it's found
in Xenmgr's VmObject.hs file. This is an organizational change.

Overall, these changes are cleanup only and are not x64 dependent.

Signed-off-by: Chris [email protected]

  The VM interface actually duplicates almost every property and method.
  com.citrix.xenclient.xenmgr.vm   and
  com.citrix.xenclient.xenmgr.vm.unrestricted

  The properties being removed have are from the unrestricted interface
  and have no backend implementation in Xenmgr. Therefore, extra code
  is being autogenerated that doesn't need to be. Also we shouldn't
  advertise functions that don't actually exist.

  One property is higher up in the file to match where it's found
  in Xenmgr's VmObject.hs file. This is an organizational change.

  Overall, these changes are cleanup only and are not x64 dependent.

Signed-off-by: Chris <[email protected]>
@crogers1 crogers1 changed the title x86_64: Update idl interfaces to match changes for 64-bit support x86_64: Cleanup xenmgr_vm interface Mar 14, 2019
@crogers1
Copy link
Contributor Author

After looking over this PR again, it can just be closed. I made a mistake looking at my manager.git repo and assumed these changes were needed. I'll also be updating my manager.git PR.

@crogers1 crogers1 closed this Mar 15, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants