Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On 5/17/22 10:34, Thomas Huth wrote: >>> This remains, and that's fine. One step at time. >> Not sure how we want to proceed with that in the long run, though >> ... IIRC clearly, Paolo once said that it doesn't really belong into >> "-display" anyway and should be handled with the separate "-vnc" >> option instead? > > Not me, Gerd > (https://lore.kernel.org/all/20210825092023.81396-2-thuth@xxxxxxxxxx/T/#e8c4f826cc8ff48b9afad37703e11704137f540c8): > >> Other way around, -display vnc should be dropped. -display is about >> local displays, and there can be only one instance. -vnc / -spice >> enable remote access, and this can be done in addition to a local >> display. >> not possible: >> -display gtk + -display sdl >> possible: >> -display gtk + -vnc >> -display gtk + -vnc + -spice >> -display none + -vnc + -spice > > For what it's worth, Libvirt uses both -vnc and -spice, so we might > very well proceed with Gerd's idea. If we don't like -vnc and -spice > then it may be possible to QOMify them and go with -object. Are we ready to deprecate -display vnc?
