On Thu, Jun 09, 2011 at 02:00:57PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: > On Thu, Jun 09, 2011 at 08:01:06PM +1000, Chris Jones wrote: > > > I agree. As virtualization technology becomes more and more involved > > and frequent on users systems, particularly with advanced Linux users, > > I think there needs to be a strong focus on ensuring that all releases > > run in virtualized environments without any major issues. ie. > > Virtualbox. > > > > Perhaps a dedicated team among the developers who specialize in this area. > > I don't think there are any developers working on this area, where "this > area" is Virtualbox. We don't ship Virtualbox. We don't ship a kernel > that has any knowledge of Virtualbox. There's a good argument for having > this be part of the QA process and requiring that we boot in the common > virtualisation environments as part of the release criteria, but I don't > think we can realistically suggest that our virtualisation developers > (who work on code that has nothing to do with Virtualbox) be responsible > for that. I'm curious why virtualbox has gained so much inertia so quickly. Based solely on the number of kernel bug reports we get that seem to be related to it, I have almost zero confidence in it being reliable. Why are people choosing it over other solutions, and what can we change in qemu/kvm to get users using that instead ? Dave -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
