On 10/2/2015 1:59 AM, Michael Roth wrote:
+#
+# Since: 2.5
+##
+{ 'command': 'guest-exec',
+ 'data': { 'path': 'str', '*arg': ['str'], '*env': ['str'],
+ '*inp-data': 'str', '*capture-output': 'bool' },
+ 'returns': 'GuestExec' }
Would it make sense to just add handle (pid) to GuestExecStatus, and
have this return GuestExecStatus just the same as guest-exec-status
does? I'm not sure either way personally, just thought I'd mention it.
I do not think it's a good idea. GuestExecStatus contains mostly the
data about
the finished exec. Having GuestExec returns same struct may make wrong
assumption that it can be synchronous - wait for exec to complete and
return all
data in a single call.
Implementing synchronous GuestExec is not and easy job - either we occupy
host-guest channel for all time until task finished, which is bad or we
need to
implement multiplexed messages for concurrent qga commands.
