On Sep 7, 2010, at 12:22 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>
> On 07.09.2010, at 09:38, Tristan Gingold wrote:
>
>>
>> On Sep 7, 2010, at 12:44 AM, Andreas Färber wrote:
>>
>>> Am 05.09.2010 um 17:57 schrieb Anthony Liguori:
>>>
On 09/05/2010 10:10 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
>> As a baby step, i
On 07.09.2010, at 09:38, Tristan Gingold wrote:
>
> On Sep 7, 2010, at 12:44 AM, Andreas Färber wrote:
>
>> Am 05.09.2010 um 17:57 schrieb Anthony Liguori:
>>
>>> On 09/05/2010 10:10 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> As a baby step, is there any chance of publishing an automatic nightly
> Windo
On Sep 7, 2010, at 12:44 AM, Andreas Färber wrote:
> Am 05.09.2010 um 17:57 schrieb Anthony Liguori:
>
>> On 09/05/2010 10:10 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
As a baby step, is there any chance of publishing an automatic nightly
Windows (cross-)build as a .zip file on qemu.org? That might give
Am 05.09.2010 um 17:57 schrieb Anthony Liguori:
On 09/05/2010 10:10 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
As a baby step, is there any chance of publishing an automatic
nightly Windows (cross-)build as a .zip file on qemu.org? That
might give more users a chance of detecting runtime faults during
the deve
On 09/05/2010 12:51 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 09/05/2010 08:44 PM, andrzej zaborowski wrote:
I'm perfectly fine with dropping it. btw, there are other features
in qemu
that seem to be academic exercises - *-user for example. What is
it useful
for? Most open source stuff is multiplatform, a
On 09/05/2010 11:05 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
We don't have a massive pool of developers sitting on their hands
waiting for something else to work on. We don't have myriads of
users demanding better Windows support. Search the list, there's
almost no one asking questions about Windows and conside
On Sun, Sep 05, 2010 at 07:56:02PM +0200, andrzej zaborowski wrote:
> On 5 September 2010 19:51, Avi Kivity wrote:
> > On 09/05/2010 08:44 PM, andrzej zaborowski wrote:
> >>
> I'm perfectly fine with dropping it. btw, there are other features in
> qemu
> that seem to be academic e
On 09/05/2010 08:56 PM, andrzej zaborowski wrote:
Well, both these examples are very far from the typical end user or even
typical developer.
Some of the industrial users include all of their "app developers"
which count in big numbers. Now I haven't installed Nokia or Palm's
SDKs but Poky's
On 5 September 2010 19:51, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 09/05/2010 08:44 PM, andrzej zaborowski wrote:
>>
I'm perfectly fine with dropping it. btw, there are other features in
qemu
that seem to be academic exercises - *-user for example. What is it
useful
for? Most open sour
On 09/05/2010 08:44 PM, andrzej zaborowski wrote:
I'm perfectly fine with dropping it. btw, there are other features in qemu
that seem to be academic exercises - *-user for example. What is it useful
for? Most open source stuff is multiplatform, and serious commercial work
needs something f
On 5 September 2010 19:33, malc wrote:
> On Sun, 5 Sep 2010, Avi Kivity wrote:
>
>> On 09/05/2010 06:57 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>> > On 09/05/2010 10:10 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
>> > > > As a baby step, is there any chance of publishing an automatic nightly
>> > > > Windows (cross-)build as a .zi
On 5 September 2010 17:05, Avi Kivity wrote:
> I'm perfectly fine with dropping it. btw, there are other features in qemu
> that seem to be academic exercises - *-user for example. What is it useful
> for? Most open source stuff is multiplatform, and serious commercial work
> needs something fa
On Sun, 5 Sep 2010, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 09/05/2010 06:57 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> > On 09/05/2010 10:10 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> > > > As a baby step, is there any chance of publishing an automatic nightly
> > > > Windows (cross-)build as a .zip file on qemu.org? That might give more
> > >
On 09/05/2010 07:25 PM, Blue Swirl wrote:
I'm perfectly fine with dropping it. btw, there are other features in qemu
that seem to be academic exercises - *-user for example. What is it useful
for? Most open source stuff is multiplatform, and serious commercial work
needs something faster th
On Sun, Sep 5, 2010 at 4:05 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 09/05/2010 06:57 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>>
>> On 09/05/2010 10:10 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
As a baby step, is there any chance of publishing an automatic nightly
Windows (cross-)build as a .zip file on qemu.org? That might giv
On 09/05/2010 06:57 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 09/05/2010 10:10 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
As a baby step, is there any chance of publishing an automatic
nightly Windows (cross-)build as a .zip file on qemu.org? That might
give more users a chance of detecting runtime faults during the
developm
On 09/05/2010 10:10 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
As a baby step, is there any chance of publishing an automatic
nightly Windows (cross-)build as a .zip file on qemu.org? That might
give more users a chance of detecting runtime faults during the
development cycle.
That's doable and useful, yes.
I
On 09/05/2010 06:44 PM, Andreas Färber wrote:
Am 05.09.2010 um 16:17 schrieb Avi Kivity:
On 09/05/2010 05:10 PM, Blue Swirl wrote:
Easy to use GUI and integration to host system are important, but
performance is also a big problem. QEMU/TCG can't compete with
alternatives that use proprietary
Am 05.09.2010 um 16:17 schrieb Avi Kivity:
On 09/05/2010 05:10 PM, Blue Swirl wrote:
Easy to use GUI and integration to host system are important, but
performance is also a big problem. QEMU/TCG can't compete with
alternatives that use proprietary kernel modules. Someone should
recreate kqemu b
On 09/05/2010 06:01 PM, Andreas Färber wrote:
Am 05.09.2010 um 13:19 schrieb Avi Kivity:
On 09/04/2010 04:56 PM, Andreas Färber wrote:
Maybe it's time to rethink the relation between QEMU and its
frontends / management tools? If we want to compete with the
commercial products (sic), we mig
Am 05.09.2010 um 13:19 schrieb Avi Kivity:
On 09/04/2010 04:56 PM, Andreas Färber wrote:
Maybe it's time to rethink the relation between QEMU and its
frontends / management tools? If we want to compete with the
commercial products (sic), we might agree on some "official"
frontend per GUI
On 09/05/2010 05:40 PM, Blue Swirl wrote:
On Sun, Sep 5, 2010 at 2:17 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 09/05/2010 05:10 PM, Blue Swirl wrote:
Easy to use GUI and integration to host system are important, but
performance is also a big problem. QEMU/TCG can't compete with
alternatives that use propri
On Sun, Sep 5, 2010 at 2:17 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 09/05/2010 05:10 PM, Blue Swirl wrote:
>>
>> Easy to use GUI and integration to host system are important, but
>> performance is also a big problem. QEMU/TCG can't compete with
>> alternatives that use proprietary kernel modules. Someone shou
On 09/05/2010 05:10 PM, Blue Swirl wrote:
Easy to use GUI and integration to host system are important, but
performance is also a big problem. QEMU/TCG can't compete with
alternatives that use proprietary kernel modules. Someone should
recreate kqemu by using KVM compatible interfaces.
If some
On Sun, Sep 5, 2010 at 11:19 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 09/04/2010 04:56 PM, Andreas Färber wrote:
>>
>> Maybe it's time to rethink the relation between QEMU and its frontends /
>> management tools? If we want to compete with the commercial products (sic),
>> we might agree on some "official" fro
On 09/04/2010 04:56 PM, Andreas Färber wrote:
Maybe it's time to rethink the relation between QEMU and its frontends
/ management tools? If we want to compete with the commercial products
(sic), we might agree on some "official" frontend per GUI-centric
platform, with a Git-based repository
On 04.09.2010, at 16:41, Andreas Färber wrote:
> Am 17.08.2010 um 21:56 schrieb Anthony Liguori:
>
>> I think we have a lot of dump-and-run features in QEMU whereas someone
>> writes the patches to implement something and then disappears. Often time,
>> the feature is not generally useful so
Am 17.08.2010 um 21:56 schrieb Anthony Liguori:
I think we have a lot of dump-and-run features in QEMU whereas
someone writes the patches to implement something and then
disappears. Often time, the feature is not generally useful so the
code just rots. I think an awful lot of the PPC boar
Am 17.08.2010 um 21:56 schrieb Anthony Liguori:
I think my point is that Win32 is a "never to be finished feature".
Every time I've ever tried to use it, it's a short period of time
before it seg faults. I have a hard time believing that anyone is
using it seriously.
No "serious" Windows
On 17.08.2010, at 21:56, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 08/17/2010 01:38 PM, Blue Swirl wrote:
>>> But if the features aren't being used by anyone and they consistently don't
>>> work, does it matter?
>>>
>> No, but semi-actively breaking things that work now is different from
>> removing obso
On 08/17/2010 01:38 PM, Blue Swirl wrote:
But if the features aren't being used by anyone and they consistently don't
work, does it matter?
No, but semi-actively breaking things that work now is different from
removing obsolete or never to be finished features.
I think my point is
On Tue, 17 Aug 2010, Blue Swirl wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 8:42 PM, Anthony Liguori
> wrote:
> > On 08/16/2010 01:51 PM, Blue Swirl wrote:
> >>
> >> On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 9:42 PM, Anthony Liguori
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>> On 08/11/2010 11:34 AM, Blue Swirl wrote:
> >>>
>
>
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 8:42 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 08/16/2010 01:51 PM, Blue Swirl wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 9:42 PM, Anthony Liguori
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On 08/11/2010 11:34 AM, Blue Swirl wrote:
>>>
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 10:58 AM, Stefan Weil
wrote:
>
On 08/17/2010 05:09 AM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
. There have been very few patches
for Darwin, *Solaris, AIX or BSDs, non-x86 targets or non-x86 host
CPUs. Without Darwin or BSD host support, darwin-user and bsd-user
will be useless. When did we get Xen patches last time before the
recent patch set?
Am 16.08.2010 22:42, schrieb Anthony Liguori:
> On 08/16/2010 01:51 PM, Blue Swirl wrote:
>> On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 9:42 PM, Anthony Liguori
>> wrote:
>>> Historically, even when Windows builds, it spends large periods of time not
>>> actually working. I think Stefan can confirm this. Much of
On 08/16/2010 01:51 PM, Blue Swirl wrote:
On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 9:42 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 08/11/2010 11:34 AM, Blue Swirl wrote:
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 10:58 AM, Stefan Weil
wrote:
Hi,
since several months, QEMU for Windows (and mingw32 cross builds)
no longe
On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 9:42 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 08/11/2010 11:34 AM, Blue Swirl wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 10:58 AM, Stefan Weil
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> since several months, QEMU for Windows (and mingw32 cross builds)
>>> no longer builds without error.
>>>
>>
>>
On 08/11/2010 11:34 AM, Blue Swirl wrote:
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 10:58 AM, Stefan Weil wrote:
Hi,
since several months, QEMU for Windows (and mingw32 cross builds)
no longer builds without error.
Not true for mingw32, it was building fine here until the latest commit.
I suspe
Thanks, applied both.
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 7:37 PM, Stefan Weil wrote:
> Am 11.08.2010 21:19, schrieb Blue Swirl:
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 6:51 PM, Blue Swirl wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 6:18 PM, Stefan Weil
>>> wrote:
>>>
Am 11.08.2010 18:34, schrieb Blue Swirl:
Hi,
Am 11.08.2010 um 12:58 schrieb Stefan Weil:
since several months, QEMU for Windows (and mingw32 cross builds)
no longer builds without error.
I suspect that the same is true for QEMU on Darwin (lots of errors
like
darwin-user/qemu.h:149: error: cast to pointer from integer of
different
Am 11.08.2010 21:19, schrieb Blue Swirl:
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 6:51 PM, Blue Swirl wrote:
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 6:18 PM, Stefan Weil wrote:
Am 11.08.2010 18:34, schrieb Blue Swirl:
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 10:58 AM, Stefan Weil
wrote:
Hi,
since several months
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 6:51 PM, Blue Swirl wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 6:18 PM, Stefan Weil wrote:
>> Am 11.08.2010 18:34, schrieb Blue Swirl:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 10:58 AM, Stefan Weil
>>> wrote:
Hi,
since several months, QEMU for Windows (and mingw32 cross
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 6:18 PM, Stefan Weil wrote:
> Am 11.08.2010 18:34, schrieb Blue Swirl:
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 10:58 AM, Stefan Weil
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> since several months, QEMU for Windows (and mingw32 cross builds)
>>> no longer builds without error.
>>
>> Not true for
Am 11.08.2010 18:34, schrieb Blue Swirl:
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 10:58 AM, Stefan Weil
wrote:
Hi,
since several months, QEMU for Windows (and mingw32 cross builds)
no longer builds without error.
Not true for mingw32, it was building fine here until the latest commit.
That's a big surprise
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 10:58 AM, Stefan Weil wrote:
> Hi,
>
> since several months, QEMU for Windows (and mingw32 cross builds)
> no longer builds without error.
Not true for mingw32, it was building fine here until the latest commit.
> I suspect that the same is true for QEMU on Darwin (lots o
Stefan,
Sorry for directly replying. Resending to list:
At least QEMU for windows has some serious bugs, related to GDB handling,
and serial handling..
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 12:58 PM, Stefan Weil wrote:
> Hi,
>
> since several months, QEMU for Windows (and mingw32 cross builds)
> no longer
Hi,
since several months, QEMU for Windows (and mingw32 cross builds)
no longer builds without error.
I suspect that the same is true for QEMU on Darwin (lots of errors like
darwin-user/qemu.h:149: error: cast to pointer from integer of different
size),
but I'm not sure here because I have no
47 matches
Mail list logo
