Cannot register, when compacting

[thany]

When trying to compact a VDI, I'm getting this error:

Code: Select all

e:\Virtual Machines\Windows 2000>"C:\Program Files\Oracle\VirtualBox\VBoxManage.exe" modifyhd "Windows 2000.vdi" --compact
VBoxManage.exe: error: Cannot register the hard disk 'e:\Virtual Machines\Windows 2000\Windows 2000.vdi' {d81499b9-74e8-479f-a220-c5a52
3ad1def} because a hard disk 'D:\Virtual Machines\Windows 2000\Windows 2000.vdi' with UUID {d81499b9-74e8-479f-a220-c5a523ad1def} alrea
dy exists
VBoxManage.exe: error: Details: code E_INVALIDARG (0x80070057), component VirtualBox, interface IVirtualBox, callee IUnknown
VBoxManage.exe: error: Context: "OpenMedium(Bstr(pszFilenameOrUuid).raw(), enmDevType, enmAccessMode, fForceNewUuidOnOpen, pMedium.asOu
tParam())" at line 178 of file VBoxManageDisk.cpp

What is it trying to do? Register a harddisk that is already registered? No wonder it gives this error, but this command has always worked, and the thing it seems to be trying is silly.

So how to get rid of this error?

/edit
This is happening for the harddisks of all my VM's...

[noteirak]

If you look at the error, it seems that the drive letter for your disks has changed from D: to E:, and Virtualbox will see that two disks at different places have the same UUID and therefore refuse to go further. Either put it back where it was, or update your VM registrations.

[mpack]

I would have thought CloneVDI would be more appopriate for compacting the disk anyway. A Windows disk on a Windows host - bread and butter stuff.

Also, I wish you would remove that sig. The point of including version information in a discussion is to let us and future readers know what version the discussion pertains to. "The latest version!" is not adequate to that. Full and explicit diagnostic info should be given each time.

[thany]

If you look at the error, it seems that the drive letter for your disks has changed from D: to E:, and Virtualbox will see that two disks at different places have the same UUID and therefore refuse to go further. Either put it back where it was, or update your VM registrations.

How do I update my VM registration then? They are already pointing to where the VM sits, so in my (or any not-developer's) point of view, the registrations are correct.

I would have thought CloneVDI would be more appopriate for compacting the disk anyway. A Windows disk on a Windows host - bread and butter stuff.

I don't quite understand what you're getting at here. Also a clone would produce a new VDI, which I would probably have to attach manually and is generally more of a hassle. Compacting is exactly meant for this kind of thing.

Also, I wish you would remove that sig. The point of including version information in a discussion is to let us and future readers know what version the discussion pertains to. "The latest version!" is not adequate to that. Full and explicit diagnostic info should be given each time.

A man can wish, right? "The latest version" is 100% accurate. If it's not adequate, then I have no way of knowing what kind of diagnostic information to supply.

[noteirak]

How do I update my VM registration then? They are already pointing to where the VM sits, so in my (or any not-developer's) point of view, the registrations are correct.

If they are, then you are trying to compact a disk that you copied over from the real source. In which case what you should do is clone.
You either want to compact the real disk of the VM, in which case what you say is not possible, or you want to compact a mere copy of it. In which case you need to update the UUID - see user manual.

I don't quite understand what you're getting at here. Also a clone would produce a new VDI, which I would probably have to attach manually and is generally more of a hassle. Compacting is exactly meant for this kind of thing.

You clearly didn't read the user notes included with CloneVDI.

A man can wish, right? "The latest version" is 100% accurate. If it's not adequate, then I have no way of knowing what kind of diagnostic information to supply.

it still doesn't tell us which version you're running at a precise moment in the past. If a new version comes out tomorrow and solves the very issue you're talking about here, how are we to know which version you're talking about? or anyone else reading this topic later on?

Regardless, it's time for you to go read the Virtualbox User Manual, the CloneVDI Release note & full topic and give us proper information if required. You clearly don't need our help here.

[thany]

Hey, you can be impolite all you want, but an error is an error. And basically saying "RTFM" is no help to anyone - not me, and certainly not anyone finding this topic by chance. You *could* point me in the right direction: what, where, how. "The manual" is big, and I'm not going to plow through it. I don't have time for that. Noone does, so deal with it.

That said, I'll try to update the UUID, but a user should not have to hassle with system ID's ever. I'm saying there's simply no reason for this error to occur, because it is so blazingly clear what needs to happen, that VB could correct the error all by itself. I mean, choosing UUID's to identify a VDI, rather than humble filenames, is not my design, and I don't want to be bothered by it.Moving a VDI from one place to the next, is a perfectly reasonable thing to do, and I think it's silly if VB still cannot withstand such a mundane operation.

So anyway, I'll fix the problem by trying to correct the UUID's, but this is still a bug in VB itself that needs to be addressed.

[noteirak]

If you feel that the error should not happen and is a dev mistake, then you are free to address such opinion in the Suggestions subforum, or the dev mailing list directly.
As for the issue, I gave you the information required to solve it - CloneVDI would solve exactly your issue, but clearly it's not worth your time.

So feel free to use your time the way you feel best, that is all fine by me. I'll consider this topic solved personally.

[mpack]

I'll tell you my take on this: if someone refuses to read documentation or provide necessary diagnostic information then they don't deserve any of my (free) time. I'll move on to the next thread, like I'm doing now.

[thany]

Seriously?
Do you not want people to report problems?

Look, I'm taking time out of my life to report a problem in software that's not even mine, and potentially (indirectly) help improve the software, and what do I get? Honestly, guys, you need to think really hard about how you're doing here.

I do not flat out refuse to read the documentation. All I said is that I'm not about to plow through cryptic wording page after page, when I want to do something quite simple. I did not give diagnostic information, because I wouldn't know what to give. Noone asked for anything specific. I even gave the exact error message. I could have said "it doesn't work" and be done with it, but I took some effort that I did not HAVE to take. Yet, all I get is yelling and punishing.

If reporting a problem is not appreciated, then I don't know what else to do.

/edit
And yes, I do know about CloneVDI. What I'm trying to say is, it should not be neccesary. It makes perfect sens to copy the VDI as a file - it doesn't chance the nature (or content) of a VDI by copying it.

[Perryg]

If I may,

Can you explain why if you have the guests stored on drive E, they are reporting that they are on drive D?

If you can explain this then the rest should fall in place.