On Tue, Dec 11, 2007 at 10:49:05AM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> >On Tue, Dec 11, 2007 at 09:48:22AM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> >
> >>Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> >>
> >>Actually, this was the original intention of the -name parameter. What
> >>a management too
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Tue, Dec 11, 2007 at 09:48:22AM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote:
Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
Actually, this was the original intention of the -name parameter. What
a management tool would want to do is:
1) if -name is specified by user, generate one with uuidgen
2
Paul Brook wrote:
Why can't we make the monitor interface a "formal" interface?
Because then fixing a type or extending the interface becomes a pain.
It's also much more difficult to specify a text-base interface
completey, compared to a C api (where sometimes all you need is the
header
> > Why can't we make the monitor interface a "formal" interface?
>
> Because then fixing a type or extending the interface becomes a pain.
>
> It's also much more difficult to specify a text-base interface
> completey, compared to a C api (where sometimes all you need is the
> header and a few com
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Tue, Dec 11, 2007 at 09:16:43AM +0200, Yuval Kashtan wrote:
- This is very useful when you want to manage and control QEMU, for instance
developing a GUI to attach and detach usb devices or controlling more than
one instance of QEMU from a single management point, re
Avi Kivity wrote:
libqemumonitor.so is an excellent idea. perhaps the libvirt code can be
used as a base?
We should also provide bindings to the saner languages that management
apps are typically written in.
Libvirt has most of the major languages covered now. The only language
I'm aware o
Anthony Liguori wrote:
Yuval Kashtan wrote:
As I can see,
There is HUGH interest in management API for QEMU.
seemly, DBus is NOT the right solution for direct integration into
QEMU as it is not cross platform enough, pose extra dependency and
(probably) not suitable for embedded systems.
Kee
Anthony Liguori wrote:
Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> Anthony Liguori wrote:
>> Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>>> Or have 2 monitor interaction modes. One mode uses the command line
>>> style
>>> suitable for people / scripting languages. The other umode ses a
>>> binary XDR
>>> protocol for serializin
On Tue, Dec 11, 2007 at 09:48:22AM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>
> Actually, this was the original intention of the -name parameter. What
> a management tool would want to do is:
>
> 1) if -name is specified by user, generate one with uuidgen
> 2) pass -name and -
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
I think that many projects now want to control qemu programatically.
The monitor is not a good interface since it is text-based, hard to
parse, and liable to change without notice when new features are added.
However, I agree that having many similar constructs is
Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
Anthony Liguori wrote:
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
Or have 2 monitor interaction modes. One mode uses the command line
style
suitable for people / scripting languages. The other umode ses a
binary XDR
protocol for serializing the args & returns values for formal contro
On Tue, Dec 11, 2007 at 09:16:43AM +0200, Yuval Kashtan wrote:
> - This is very useful when you want to manage and control QEMU, for instance
> developing a GUI to attach and detach usb devices or controlling more than
> one instance of QEMU from a single management point, receiving parameters
> ex
Anthony Liguori wrote:
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
Or have 2 monitor interaction modes. One mode uses the command line style
suitable for people / scripting languages. The other umode ses a
binary XDR
protocol for serializing the args & returns values for formal control
APIs to use in a easy man
Yuval Kashtan wrote:
As I can see,
There is HUGH interest in management API for QEMU.
seemly, DBus is NOT the right solution for direct integration into
QEMU as it is not cross platform enough, pose extra dependency and
(probably) not suitable for embedded systems.
Keeping only the "old" moni
On Tue, Dec 11, 2007 at 05:21:08PM +0200, Yuval Kashtan wrote:
> As I can see,
> There is HUGH interest in management API for QEMU.
> seemly, DBus is NOT the right solution for direct integration into QEMU as
> it is not cross platform enough, pose extra dependency and (probably) not
> suitable for
On Tue, Dec 11, 2007 at 04:17:51PM +0100, Jean-Christian de Rivaz wrote:
> Anthony Liguori a écrit :
> > The main objection I have to dbus is that it's very heavy weight. It
> >implies a rather fat infrastructure and it not very suitable for
> >embedding. QEMU has very few dependencies and that
As I can see,
There is HUGH interest in management API for QEMU.
seemly, DBus is NOT the right solution for direct integration into QEMU as
it is not cross platform enough, pose extra dependency and (probably) not
suitable for embedded systems.
Keeping only the "old" monitor interface with no form
Anthony Liguori a écrit :
> The main objection I have to dbus is that it's very heavy weight. It
implies a rather fat infrastructure and it not very suitable for
embedding. QEMU has very few dependencies and that is a strength ATM.
People interested in embedding QEMU still want a good manage
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Tue, Dec 11, 2007 at 08:51:32AM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote:
Dor Laor wrote:
Laurent Vivier wrote:
Le mardi 11 décembre 2007 à 10:10 +0100, Fabrice Bellard a écrit :
Hi,
Hi,
At this point I am not interested i
On Tue, Dec 11, 2007 at 08:51:32AM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> Dor Laor wrote:
> >Laurent Vivier wrote:
> >>Le mardi 11 décembre 2007 à 10:10 +0100, Fabrice Bellard a écrit :
> >>
> >>>Hi,
> >>>
> >>
> >>Hi,
> >>
> >>
> >>>At this point I am not interested in integrating it into QEMU as
On Tue, Dec 11, 2007 at 08:51:32AM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> Dor Laor wrote:
> >Laurent Vivier wrote:
> >>Le mardi 11 décembre 2007 à 10:10 +0100, Fabrice Bellard a écrit :
> >>
> >>>Hi,
> >>>
> >>
> >>Hi,
> >>
> >>
> >>>At this point I am not interested in integrating it into QEMU as
On Tue, Dec 11, 2007 at 01:05:38PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
> Fabrice Bellard wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> >At this point I am not interested in integrating it into QEMU as it is
> >one more API level to maintain in addition to the command line
> >monitor. However, I can change my mind if several projects
On Mon, Dec 10, 2007 at 10:28:01AM +0200, Yuval Kashtan wrote:
> Hello All,
> Attached is a proposed patch which adds DBus support to QEMU. DBus is a
> standard message bus for linux (
> http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/dbus )
> The idea behind this is to allow for external programs such as
Dor Laor wrote:
Laurent Vivier wrote:
Le mardi 11 décembre 2007 à 10:10 +0100, Fabrice Bellard a écrit :
Hi,
Hi,
At this point I am not interested in integrating it into QEMU as it is
one more API level to maintain in addition to the command line monitor.
However, I can change m
Avi Kivity wrote:
Fabrice Bellard wrote:
Hi,
At this point I am not interested in integrating it into QEMU as it
is one more API level to maintain in addition to the command line
monitor. However, I can change my mind if several projects insists to
have a similar interface.
I think that
Fabrice Bellard wrote:
Hi,
At this point I am not interested in integrating it into QEMU as it is
one more API level to maintain in addition to the command line
monitor. However, I can change my mind if several projects insists to
have a similar interface.
I think that many projects now w
Am 11.12.2007 um 11:29 schrieb Laurent Vivier:
Le mardi 11 décembre 2007 à 11:20 +0100, Andreas Färber a écrit :
Am 11.12.2007 um 10:23 schrieb Laurent Vivier:
perhaps the DBUS interface can replace the command line monitor ?
We have just to move the command line interface to a client speaki
Le mardi 11 décembre 2007 à 11:20 +0100, Andreas Färber a écrit :
> Am 11.12.2007 um 10:23 schrieb Laurent Vivier:
>
> > perhaps the DBUS interface can replace the command line monitor ?
> > We have just to move the command line interface to a client speaking
> > to
> > qemu through the DBUS int
Laurent Vivier kirjoitti:
Le mardi 11 décembre 2007 à 10:10 +0100, Fabrice Bellard a écrit :
Hi,
Hi,
At this point I am not interested in integrating it into QEMU as it is
one more API level to maintain in addition to the command line monitor.
However, I can change my mind if several projec
Am 11.12.2007 um 10:23 schrieb Laurent Vivier:
perhaps the DBUS interface can replace the command line monitor ?
We have just to move the command line interface to a client speaking
to
qemu through the DBUS interface.
That would work for few platforms only!
Andreas
Laurent Vivier wrote:
Le mardi 11 décembre 2007 à 10:10 +0100, Fabrice Bellard a écrit :
Hi,
Hi,
At this point I am not interested in integrating it into QEMU as it is
one more API level to maintain in addition to the command line monitor.
However, I can change my mind if several
Laurent Vivier wrote:
Le mardi 11 décembre 2007 à 10:10 +0100, Fabrice Bellard a écrit :
Hi,
Hi,
At this point I am not interested in integrating it into QEMU as it is
one more API level to maintain in addition to the command line monitor.
However, I can change my mind if several projects in
Le mardi 11 décembre 2007 à 10:10 +0100, Fabrice Bellard a écrit :
> Hi,
Hi,
> At this point I am not interested in integrating it into QEMU as it is
> one more API level to maintain in addition to the command line monitor.
> However, I can change my mind if several projects insists to have a
Hi,
At this point I am not interested in integrating it into QEMU as it is
one more API level to maintain in addition to the command line monitor.
However, I can change my mind if several projects insists to have a
similar interface.
Regards,
Fabrice.
Yuval Kashtan wrote:
Some answers:
-
Some answers:
- If there is interest I can re-create the patch so it will work against the
current head. I thought to receive some comments about it first..
- thanks for the styling and configuration remarks, I will certainly fix
these. But before I invest more time in it, I would like to hear what
On 12/10/07, Yuval Kashtan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello All,
> Attached is a proposed patch which adds DBus support to QEMU. DBus is a
> standard message bus for linux
> (http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/dbus )
> The idea behind this is to allow for external programs such as controlli
36 matches
Mail list logo
