After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 751727 - Config option to disable suspend of VMs when clicking back or exiting
Config option to disable suspend of VMs when clicking back or exiting
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 746754
Product: gnome-boxes
Classification: Applications
Component: general
3.16.x
Other Linux
: Normal major
: --
Assigned To: GNOME Boxes maintainer(s)
GNOME Boxes maintainer(s)
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2015-06-30 13:41 UTC by Stephen
Modified: 2016-09-20 08:15 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---



Description Stephen 2015-06-30 13:41:14 UTC
Please add the above option - I believe this warrants a UI pref, but dconf at least, as the current behaviour has some serious drawbacks as the only option.

The current behavious of suspending/unsuspending VMs when backgrounded means, among other things, that:

* Background tasks cannot be run in one VM while interacting with another.
* Switching between VMs varies between slow and very slow, because of the heavy IO involved in suspending/unsuspending.

Right now the only way to manage multiple VMs without suspending all but one, is to use the 'open in a new window' option, and then keep a separate window open for every VM all the time.

Switching to a second VM without suspending the first is very unintuitive with this approach - you have to 'open in new window' the current VM, then switch back to the previous window, which then shows the other VMs, and you can then open the next one - not an obvious mechanism at all.

Please also make it possible for disabling of VM suspension to apply to closing Boxes as well.

A variation might be to prompt for suspension on 'back' and close actions, with 'this time' and 'always' options, with a relevant pref in the UI.
Comment 1 Zeeshan Ali 2015-06-30 15:36:02 UTC

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 743854 ***
Comment 2 Zeeshan Ali 2015-06-30 15:37:18 UTC
(In reply to Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) from comment #1)
> 
> *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 743854 ***

error.. wrong bug!

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 746754 ***