Re: KVM call agenda for Jan 26

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 01/26/2010 07:24 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 01/26/2010 03:18 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:

The main question is where does it belong?

a) built into qemu
b) built as separate tool, but shipped with qemu
c) completely separate

I'm personally leaning towards a. That way we can reuse the detection code and give help when an option is used that doesn't work.


Me too, especially as the whole stack is involved, and qemu is the topmost part from our perspective (no doubt libvirt will want to integrate that functionality as well).

I'm not sure I agree. It would use no code from qemu and really benefit in no way from being part of qemu. I don't feel that strongly about it though.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [KVM ARM]     [KVM ia64]     [KVM ppc]     [Virtualization Tools]     [Spice Development]     [Libvirt]     [Libvirt Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Questions]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]
  Powered by Linux