On Fri, 2019-06-21 at 18:13 -0400, Cole Robinson wrote: > On 6/20/19 9:58 AM, Andrea Bolognani wrote: > > I'm obviously biased here, since a big part of what I do is caring > > about non-x86 architectures :) but I would consider any application > > that doesn't have proper multi-architecture support as a core > > principle to be inherently flawed, so having to spell this out at > > all seems backwards. > > For most cases like a C library, I agree. But this a bit different > though, apps need to hardcode some knowledge about every non-x86 arch in > order to generate a working config. Things have unified a _lot_ over the > past few years, but there's still the issue that say spice isn't > available on PPC64 hosts, that aarch64 requires UEFI to be able to use > traditional install methods where x86 doesn't, that some archs need an > explicit non-default machine type like 'virt' while others can get away > with the default. If someone wrote a new virt-manager tomorrow I > wouldn't begrudge them ignoring non-x86 until someone with hardware > showed up with patches or offered to help. I would! In fact, even more so now that libvirt and virt-install have seen significant improvements to their multi-arch support: if you wanted to create a new virt-manager it would have to be at least as good as the existing one, not worse! :) > > Now if you were talking about the ability to create non-x86 guests > > on x86 through the use of TCG, then I absolutely agree that it's an > > advanced feature mostly interesting to developers. But being able > > to create and managing non-x86 KVM guests on a non-x86 host should > > be as vital to virt-manager as doing the same on x86. > > I understand the sentiment. But the general point of this exercise to > rank some kind of priority or importance. My perception is that using > virt-manager for non-x86 is low single digit percent usage of the app, > and that most of those users are highly technical people to begin with, > using virt as part of a development environment and not for desktopy use > cases. And I suspect most of those if they are using it are managing > virt on a remote non-x86 host anyways, which also puts it into > non-beginner territory IMO. That's a fair point, and seeing the above I guess having it spelled out in the "intermediate users" section is actually better than not mentioning it at all, lest anyone forgets about it O:-) -- Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization _______________________________________________ virt-tools-list mailing list virt-tools-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/virt-tools-list
