From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B53D89321D
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue,  3 Jan 2023 17:10:43 +0100 (CET)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 8DC7FD627
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue,  3 Jan 2023 17:10:43 +0100 (CET)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com
 [94.136.29.106])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue,  3 Jan 2023 17:10:42 +0100 (CET)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
 by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id C113B4500C
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue,  3 Jan 2023 17:10:41 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <302313aa-c03b-9df8-7704-07bd896bec95@proxmox.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2023 17:10:41 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:109.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/109.0
Content-Language: en-GB
To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>,
 Stefan Hanreich <s.hanreich@proxmox.com>
References: <20230103144501.1103523-1-s.hanreich@proxmox.com>
 <0b962a8c-9b6c-d2f9-f515-322919381baa@proxmox.com>
 <58de1869-0dc4-4eb7-4ec5-9bc80a455aec@proxmox.com>
From: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <58de1869-0dc4-4eb7-4ec5-9bc80a455aec@proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL 1.539 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
 BAYES_00                 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
 KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment
 NICE_REPLY_A           -3.142 Looks like a legit reply (A)
 SPF_HELO_NONE           0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
 SPF_PASS               -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record
Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH qemu-server] fix #4358: destroy_vm: Ignore
 'suspended' lock when destroying VM
X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2023 16:10:43 -0000

Am 03/01/2023 um 16:52 schrieb Stefan Hanreich:
>=20
> Yes, I just (double-)checked. Both disk image and suspended state get r=
emoved.
>=20
>>
>> Maybe=C2=A0a=C2=A0extra=C2=A0hint=C2=A0for=C2=A0such=C2=A0things=C2=A0=
in=C2=A0the=C2=A0web=C2=A0UI=C2=A0could=C2=A0be=C2=A0nice,=C2=A0but
>> must=C2=A0not=C2=A0necessarily=C2=A0be=C2=A0tied=C2=A0to=C2=A0this=C2=A0=
patch=C2=A0(series).
>=20
> Should not be too hard to add, I'll make a v2 with the proposed changes=
 to=C2=A0the=C2=A0commit=C2=A0message?

Fine for me, note that I threw the idea of the hint mostly just out there=
,
so don't just do it because I asked for it ^^