> can I write a file based file system and read it from the host? I can
> guarantee I have stopped writing before I read on the host side. I can
> even unmount before reading.
If only one machine (host or guest) has mounted the device then it should
always be safe to do this. You may get away
can I write a file based file system and read it from the host? I can
guarantee I have stopped writing before I read on the host side. I can
even unmount before reading.
ideally, I would like to "import" my flash memory device into the guest
OS side (USB based) but if I can create a "virtual
I've tracked down guest winxp SP1 boot problems to bad ESCD bios data.
A lot of talk here:
http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/31874/?o=0
But I think this is the key:
http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/31874/?o=50
I have had it freeze AT Mups.sys and just after when loading
> Given that QEMU can support the current release of GCC on Windows by
> changing less than 40 lines of code in one file, can we please begin
> discussing the inclusion of these changes in the main codebase?
> Explicitly specifying this one variable name in a preprocessor directive
> doesn't lo
> I'm not sure what you mean about the patch "not being necessary". I
> haven't tried building with Cygwin, so I can't speak for that platform.
> My build environment is MinGW with the MSYS shell (to avoid onerous
> licensing issues and DLL dependencies), and I can assure that the patch
> very
Christian MICHON wrote:
First rule of (efficient) engineering: <>
for the record: gcc-3.3-x is *fine* and *most* stable,
not just on windows. It's still my reference compiler
even for linux kernels.
Why do you feel it's necessary to upgrade? Because
gcc people do?
Don't get me wrong, Ch
Paul Brook wrote:
"sledgehammer" and "nut" spring to mind :-)
The attached patch is sufficient to get qemu working on win32 when compiled
with gcc3.4. I've successfully booted a knoppix CD inside qemu on a windows
host with this patch.
The problem was that gcc is choosing inconvenient names
Paul Brook wrote:
qvm86 does not yet suppot amd64 hosts. It only works on amd64 hardware when
running a 32-bit kernel.
ok, I've got amd64, win xp guest, and I'm a programmer
if you need some help (but don't know qemu/qvm86 code).
--
Pozdrowienia,
Adrian Smarzewski
___
First rule of (efficient) engineering: <>
for the record: gcc-3.3-x is *fine* and *most* stable,
not just on windows. It's still my reference compiler
even for linux kernels.
Why do you feel it's necessary to upgrade? Because
gcc people do? There's *no* speed improvement, as
far as I can see (wel
Hi!
Steve D. Perkins wrote:
Paul Brook wrote:
Are you sure you included the correct patch?
I don't see anything win32 specific about this patch. AFAICS it's
just the gcc4 patch *that I wrote* and posed some time ago.
Both cygwin and mingw is still using gcc3.4.x, so it shouldn't be
necessa
Paul Brook wrote:
Are you sure you included the correct patch?
I don't see anything win32 specific about this patch. AFAICS it's just the
gcc4 patch *that I wrote* and posed some time ago.
Both cygwin and mingw is still using gcc3.4.x, so it shouldn't be necessary.
Paul -
Please don'
On Saturday 30 July 2005 19:42, Steve D. Perkins wrote:
> Hello all -
>
> I wrote to the list a few days ago to gauge interest in adding
> support for GCC in the Win32 environment to the QEMU codebase. I
> received no response to that inquiry, but decided to update my patch for
> the 0.7.1 rel
Hello all -
I wrote to the list a few days ago to gauge interest in adding
support for GCC in the Win32 environment to the QEMU codebase. I
received no response to that inquiry, but decided to update my patch for
the 0.7.1 release anyway in hopes that it will be of use to people. The
pat
On Saturday 30 July 2005 15:12, Adrian Smarzewski wrote:
> Flavio Visentin wrote:
> > Did you try qvm86? Sometimes kqemu works better, sometimes qvm86 is
> > the best choice, sometimes nothing is better than not using
> > acceleration. :-)
> >
> > Ususally I try all the three solutions and the prob
Flavio Visentin wrote:
Did you try qvm86? Sometimes kqemu works better, sometimes qvm86 is
the best choice, sometimes nothing is better than not using
acceleration. :-)
Ususally I try all the three solutions and the problem goes away.
I have problems compiling qemu with qvm86 (newest version
Hi.
I can confirm that the fix for the PAGE_KERNEL_EXEC issue works with my
kernel 2.6.12.1, gcc 3.3.4, i386.
Now kqemu works with Win95! I have one question: there is a setting
MAX_INSTANCES in kqemu source, set to 4. It has influence on the size of
memory allowed to be locked (by qemu?). W
On 7/30/05, Jung-uk Kim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Okay. I finally found a fix. It was actually quite simple. Newer
> FreeBSD and Linux ATA drivers check whether the PCI ATA controller is
> in legacy ATA mode (aka PATA mode). The test failed and it was
> treated like a SATA controller. Of
17 matches
Mail list logo
