[Qemu-devel] Nokia N770 and/or N800 emulation

Is anybody working on N770 and/or N800 emulation for qemu? Warner

Re: [kvm-devel] [Qemu-devel] Réf. : Re: [PATCH][RFC] Allowing QEMU to direc tly executeadirectory (and storing command li ne options in it)

Hi, On Sat, 1 Sep 2007, Avi Kivity wrote: > Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > > > > I think passing only the directory name is better because it can be like > > > a "black box" : the user don't have to know how it is inside. > > > > > > > I consider this a super downside. > > > > "If you t

Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [kvm-devel] [PATCH][RFC] Allowing QEMU to directly execute a directory (and storing command line options in it)

On 9/1/07, Andreas Färber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > What you are basically doing is taking up the concept of a bundle but > call it directory, do not give it a mandatory folder name extension > and limit the usefulness of the configuration file to your personal > needs. I think the problem he

Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [kvm-devel] [PATCH][RFC] Allowing QEMU to directly execute a directory (and storing command line options in it)

Am 01.09.2007 um 20:45 schrieb Jorge Lucángeli Obes: And I don't understand why, when going along with the bundle idea, you are suddenly creating a new configuration file format of your own. There is a standard format, XML or text based, which can be easily parsed with OSX APIs (and thus likely

Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: e1000 emulation

On Sun, Aug 26, 2007 at 02:25:57PM +0200, Triggered wrote: > Dan Aloni schreef: > > Hello, > > > > Is anyone interested in a patch for an unstable, though working e1000 > > emulation for > > QEMU? It is aimed for this chip-set version: > > > > 0e:00.0 Ethernet controller: Intel Corporation 82573L

Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [kvm-devel] [PATCH][RFC] Allowing QEMU to directly execute a directory (and storing command line options in it)

> And I don't understand why, when going along with the bundle idea, > you are suddenly creating a new configuration file format of your > own. There is a standard format, XML or text based, which can be > easily parsed with OSX APIs (and thus likely *Step APIs as well) as a > dictionary, allowing

Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [et-mgmt-tools] Image Corruption Possible with qemu and qemu-kvm

Hi all, On Wed, 29 Aug 2007, Alexander Graf wrote: Paul Jakma wrote: On Mon, 27 Aug 2007, Anthony Liguori wrote: I think this is the right level myself. Advisory locks work okay but not all filesystems support them... I think it would do more harm than good to have a feature like that was s

[Qemu-devel] Current CVS build errors on RH9

It's been a few months since I comipled from source so I just tried with current CVS and got these errors on RH9: /home/wine/qemu/linux-user/syscall.c: In function `sys_tgkill': /home/wine/qemu/linux-user/syscall.c:170: `__NR_tgkill' undeclared (first use in this function) /home/wine/qemu/linux-

Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [kvm-devel] [PATCH][RFC] Allowing QEMU to directly execute a directory (and storing command line options in it)

Am 01.09.2007 um 16:26 schrieb Luke -Jr: On Saturday 01 September 2007, Markus Hitter wrote: qemu -c MyImage/vm.cfg In opposite to "qemu -c MyImage" ? Why do you want the user to do extra typing? There's one config in one directory, so typing the config file name is just redundant. Why wo

Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [kvm-devel] [PATCH][RFC] Allowing QEMU to directly execute a directory (and storing command line options in it)

Am 01.09.2007 um 13:02 schrieb Markus Hitter: Am 31.08.2007 um 20:54 schrieb Anthony Liguori: It makes little sense to pass a directory when you can pass a config file and assume that the directory the config file is in is the CWD. In fact, most people having designed bundle-type document

Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [kvm-devel] [PATCH][RFC] Allowing QEMU to directly execute a directory (and storing command line options in it)

On Saturday 01 September 2007, Markus Hitter wrote: > > qemu -c MyImage/vm.cfg > > In opposite to "qemu -c MyImage" ? > > Why do you want the user to do extra typing? There's one config in > one directory, so typing the config file name is just redundant. Why would there only be one config in one

Re: [kvm-devel] [Qemu-devel] Réf. : Re: [PATCH][RFC] Allowing QEMU to direc tly executeadirectory (and storing command li ne options in it)

Johannes Schindelin wrote: I think passing only the directory name is better because it can be like a "black box" : the user don't have to know how it is inside. I consider this a super downside. "If you think your users are idiots, only idiots will use it [your software]." I don

Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [kvm-devel] [PATCH][RFC] Allowing QEMU to directly execute a directory (and storing command line options in it)

Am 31.08.2007 um 20:54 schrieb Anthony Liguori: It makes little sense to pass a directory when you can pass a config file and assume that the directory the config file is in is the CWD. In fact, most people having designed bundle-type document formats came to a different conclusion:

Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: Réf. : Re: [kv m-devel] [PATCH][RFC] Allowing QEMU to directly executeadirectory (and storing command line options in it)

On 9/1/07, Luke -Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Friday 31 August 2007, Anthony Liguori wrote: > > You're overriding what "qemu my_pc" means. "qemu my_pc" create a QEMU > > vm with 128m of memory and -hda my_pc with the default network card. > > Why should -hda be assumed instead of -c or -c X/