GNOME Bugzilla – Bug 700777
order change in overview
Last modified: 2016-03-31 13:22:07 UTC
I started an express install of xp the installing box appeared after all the other boxes in the overview at some point, I clicked it to see what was happening when going back to the overview, it was suddenly the first in the list How is the order of boxes in the overview defined ?
It should put the most recently used boxes first, but there was a bug with that: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=700284 However I think there's still one remaining bug in that new boxes under express install should also be sorted first rather, which may not be the case at the moment (I'd have to test again).
Created attachment 244937 [details] [review] Make sure newly created VMs are marked as used recently When creating a VM for an unattended install, we don't connect to its display automatically but run it minimized. This means it never gets marked as recently used automatically as this is done in the Display class. This commit sets Machine::access_last_time when starting a VM through VMCreator::launch_vm() to ensure the newly created VM appears first in the collection view even if it's an express install.
Review of attachment 244937 [details] [review]: ACK
Shouldn't we do the same for remote boxes?
Comment on attachment 244937 [details] [review] Make sure newly created VMs are marked as used recently Attachment 244937 [details] pushed as 9974d70 - Make sure newly created VMs are marked as used recently
(In reply to comment #4) > Shouldn't we do the same for remote boxes? We don't want to mark all remote boxes as recently used (think of a RHEV instance with 10 VMs that you never use). Ideally, we'd be able to set boxes access_last_time remotely, with a fallback to storing that value locally, but remote boxes with unknown access_last_time should only be marked as recently used when the user connects to it imo.
(In reply to comment #6) > (In reply to comment #4) > > Shouldn't we do the same for remote boxes? > > We don't want to mark all remote boxes as recently used (think of a RHEV > instance with 10 VMs that you never use). Ideally, we'd be able to set boxes > access_last_time remotely, with a fallback to storing that value locally, but > remote boxes with unknown access_last_time should only be marked as recently > used when the user connects to it imo. No, I meant like when you add a single remote machine through URI in the wizard. Its very likely that you want to start using it immediately.
(In reply to comment #7) > No, I meant like when you add a single remote machine through URI in the > wizard. Its very likely that you want to start using it immediately. Ah yeah, I'll try to look into that.
Created attachment 245384 [details] [review] Make sure new remote VMs are marked as used recently When creating a VM for a remote connection (SPICE/VNC) we don't connect to its display automatically but run it minimized. This means it never gets marked as recently used automatically as this is done in the Display class. This commit sets Machine::access_last_time when creating a RemoteMachine instance to ensure the newly created VM appears first in the collection view.
Review of attachment 245384 [details] [review]: In addition to that, we should automatically display the VM when adding a remote box rather than just adding it to the overview, but I'll open another bug for that.
Review of attachment 245384 [details] [review]: ACK
(In reply to comment #10) > Review of attachment 245384 [details] [review]: > > In addition to that, we should automatically display the VM when adding a > remote box rather than just adding it to the overview, but I'll open another > bug for that. Sorry, I didn't get that. Display the VM when adding remote box? You mean we should launch the (remote) box after adding it just like we do with VM boxes that are not express installed?
(In reply to comment #12) > (In reply to comment #10) > > Review of attachment 245384 [details] [review] [details]: > > > > In addition to that, we should automatically display the VM when adding a > > remote box rather than just adding it to the overview, but I'll open another > > bug for that. > > Sorry, I didn't get that. Display the VM when adding remote box? You mean we > should launch the (remote) box after adding it just like we do with VM boxes > that are not express installed? Yes, except that it's not really 'launching' as it's already running, but yeah, connect to it as we do for non-express installations indeed.
Attachment 245384 [details] pushed as 5c29967 - Make sure new remote VMs are marked as used recently