On Sun, 2013-08-11 at 16:45 +0200, Andreas Färber wrote:
> Am 11.08.2013 12:33, schrieb Michael S. Tsirkin:
> > On Fri, Aug 02, 2013 at 10:27:31AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >> On 08/02/2013 09:04 AM, Hu Tao wrote:
> >>> The problem with pvpanic being an internal device is that VMs running
> >>>
On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 04:45:03PM +0200, Andreas Färber wrote:
> Am 11.08.2013 12:33, schrieb Michael S. Tsirkin:
> > On Fri, Aug 02, 2013 at 10:27:31AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >> On 08/02/2013 09:04 AM, Hu Tao wrote:
> >>> The problem with pvpanic being an internal device is that VMs runnin
Am 11.08.2013 12:33, schrieb Michael S. Tsirkin:
> On Fri, Aug 02, 2013 at 10:27:31AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> On 08/02/2013 09:04 AM, Hu Tao wrote:
>>> The problem with pvpanic being an internal device is that VMs running
>>> operating systems without a driver for this device will have probl
On Fri, Aug 02, 2013 at 10:27:31AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 08/02/2013 09:04 AM, Hu Tao wrote:
> >The problem with pvpanic being an internal device is that VMs running
> >operating systems without a driver for this device will have problems
> >when qemu will be upgraded (from qemu without t
On 08/02/2013 09:04 AM, Hu Tao wrote:
The problem with pvpanic being an internal device is that VMs running
operating systems without a driver for this device will have problems
when qemu will be upgraded (from qemu without this pvpanic).
The outcome may be, for example: in Windows(let's say XP)
The problem with pvpanic being an internal device is that VMs running
operating systems without a driver for this device will have problems
when qemu will be upgraded (from qemu without this pvpanic).
The outcome may be, for example: in Windows(let's say XP) the Device
manager will open a "new dev
