On Sun, Nov 6, 2011 at 9:11 PM, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> I really don't see the point in doing that. We want to be part of >> regular kernel history and release cycle. > > But I'm pretty certain that, when testing 3.2 with KVM tool in a couple of > years, I want all the shining new features you added in this time; I don't > want the old end-2011 code. Same if I'm bisecting kernels, I don't want to > build KVM tool once per bisection cycle, do I? If you're bisecting breakage that can be in the guest kernel or the KVM tool, you'd want to build both. What would prevent you from using a newer KVM tool with an older kernel? -- 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
