On 20 July 2011 18:24, Markus Armbruster <arm...@redhat.com> wrote: > We try the drive defined with -drive if=ide,index=0 (or equivalent > sugar). We use it only if (dinfo && bdrv_is_inserted(dinfo->bdrv) && > !bdrv_is_removable(dinfo->bdrv)). This is a convoluted way to test > for "drive media can't be removed". > > The only way to create such a drive with -drive if=ide is media=cdrom. > And that sets dinfo->media_cd, so just test that.
This is a less generic test and more prone to be broken inadvertently, so it seems like a step back. What's the argument against the convoluted and explicit test? Cheers
