On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 03:56:18PM -0400, Luiz Capitulino wrote: > On Wed, 20 Mar 2013 14:39:55 -0500 > mdroth <mdr...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > > > So I wonder if, rather than pursuing option 3, we just introduce an > > interface that does what we really want and returns handles as UUIDs, > > then mark the existing interfaces as deprecated (and then remove them > > within the next 300 years so our assert never gets hit :) > > This seems reasonable to me. It should be an assert() if it should never > happen. If we feel like doing option 3, we introduce a new interface > that handles UUIDs instead. >
Ok, I think it's a plan then. I have a partial implementation for guest-file-* commands on windows, and a posix/w32 guest-exec-async implementation that re-uses them, so maybe those should be introduced around the new interfaces to avoid churn. Need to generate uuid handles for guest-exec handles anyway.
