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) server-digest SHA256)
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5B3836D500
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu,  1 Apr 2021 10:55:01 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 4DFE318E5A
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu,  1 Apr 2021 10:55:01 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com
 [212.186.127.180])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256)
 (No client certificate requested)
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id 5897C18E4B
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu,  1 Apr 2021 10:55:00 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
 by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 232E7428F2;
 Thu,  1 Apr 2021 10:55:00 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <93b9f005-6922-5903-31a9-a72ea6fc7d49@proxmox.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2021 10:54:59 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:88.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/88.0
Content-Language: en-US
To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>,
 Alexandre Derumier <aderumier@odiso.com>
References: <20210328151203.2063706-1-aderumier@odiso.com>
 <20210328151203.2063706-2-aderumier@odiso.com>
From: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <20210328151203.2063706-2-aderumier@odiso.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL -0.044 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
 KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment
 NICE_REPLY_A           -0.001 Looks like a legit reply (A)
 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED        -2.3 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/,
 medium trust
 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 1/6] cloudinit: add cloudinit
 section for current generated config.
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: Thu, 01 Apr 2021 08:55:01 -0000

On 28.03.21 17:11, Alexandre Derumier wrote:
> Instead using vm pending options for pending cloudinit generated config,
> 
> write current generated cloudinit config in a new [special:cloudinit] SECTION.
> 
> Currently, some options like vm name, nic mac address can be hotplugged,
> so they are not way to know if the cloud-init disk is already updated.

actually, why isn't the pending section enough for this?

If stuff can be hot plugged then we can do so and if only that changed we
can just remove it from pending, as normally?