On Wed, Jan 17, 2007 at 01:39:13PM +0100, Karel Zak wrote: > On Wed, Jan 17, 2007 at 06:50:47AM -0500, Daniel Veillard wrote: > > Hum, honnestly I would *really* prefer to avoid systematically going though > > an RPC. No I don't like this idea, I prefer to keep the driver in libvirt > > linked in the user's space. Thibgs which were dirt cheap become way more > > expensive when they don't need to, this is a severe regression from a > > library user standpoint. > > I'm not sure if the idea is completely wrong. I think possible > advantage is that the libvirt will be pretty simple library and > almost all development (on drivers) will be happen in the libvirtd. And advantage maybe for the developper, but a definite regression for the user, and sorry the user has priority IMHO Daniel -- Red Hat Virtualization group http://redhat.com/virtualization/ Daniel Veillard | virtualization library http://libvirt.org/ veillard@xxxxxxxxxx | libxml GNOME XML XSLT toolkit http://xmlsoft.org/ http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/