[virt-tools-list] [libosinfo 1/6] Add resource data for windows OSs
Daniel P. Berrange
berrange at redhat.com
Wed Sep 14 12:48:42 UTC 2011
On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 03:04:59AM +0300, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) wrote:
> From: "Zeeshan Ali (Khattak)" <zeeshanak at gnome.org>
>
> Add resource requirements and recommendations data for windows OSs.
> ---
> data/oses/windows.xml | 109 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 files changed, 109 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/data/oses/windows.xml b/data/oses/windows.xml
> index 90a6b7e..3ba88eb 100644
> --- a/data/oses/windows.xml
> +++ b/data/oses/windows.xml
> @@ -26,6 +26,21 @@
> <publisher-id>MICROSOFT CORPORATION</publisher-id>
> </iso>
> </media>
> +
> + <resources arch="i386">
> + <minimum>
So IIUC, the units here are..
> + <cpu>233</cpu>
...MHz..
> + <n-cpus>1</n-cpus>
N/a
> + <ram>64</ram>
..MB...
> + <storage>1.5</storage>
..GB..
I'm not sure CPU MHz is particularly useful,
but it doesn't hurt to allow it & units are
fine.
Using MB for RAM is probably OK, since I doubt
we really need to be able to run with < 1 MB
of RAM.
Using GB for disks though is a little suspect
to me. I don't like seeing fractional numbers
in the XML since we loose precision and people
always get confused wrt 1024 vs 1000. A great
many (old & current) distros can actually be
installed in < 1 GB of disk, so it will not
be uncommon.
So I think we ought to use MB for storage
Daniel
--
|: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|
More information about the virt-tools-list
mailing list