Mohammed Gamal wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 8:36 PM, jvrao wrote:
>
> ... ...
>
>>> This'd be something interesting to do. I wonder if that would fit in
>>> the GSoC timeframe, or whether it'd be a little too short. So how long
>>> you'd estimate something like that would take?
>> I think i
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 8:36 PM, jvrao wrote:
... ...
>> This'd be something interesting to do. I wonder if that would fit in
>> the GSoC timeframe, or whether it'd be a little too short. So how long
>> you'd estimate something like that would take?
>
> I think it would take ~3PM for someone wi
Mohammed Gamal wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 12:54 AM, jvrao wrote:
>> Mohammed Gamal wrote:
>>> On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 9:08 PM, jvrao wrote:
jvrao wrote:
> Alexander Graf wrote:
>> On 12.04.2010, at 13:58, Jamie Lokier wrote:
>>
>>> Mohammed Gamal wrote:
On Mon,
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 12:54 AM, jvrao wrote:
> Mohammed Gamal wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 9:08 PM, jvrao wrote:
>>> jvrao wrote:
Alexander Graf wrote:
> On 12.04.2010, at 13:58, Jamie Lokier wrote:
>
>> Mohammed Gamal wrote:
>>> On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 12:29 AM, Jamie
Mohammed Gamal wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 9:08 PM, jvrao wrote:
>> jvrao wrote:
>>> Alexander Graf wrote:
On 12.04.2010, at 13:58, Jamie Lokier wrote:
> Mohammed Gamal wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 12:29 AM, Jamie Lokier
>> wrote:
>>> Javier Guerra Giraldez wr
On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 9:08 PM, jvrao wrote:
> jvrao wrote:
>> Alexander Graf wrote:
>>> On 12.04.2010, at 13:58, Jamie Lokier wrote:
>>>
Mohammed Gamal wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 12:29 AM, Jamie Lokier
> wrote:
>> Javier Guerra Giraldez wrote:
>>> On Sat, Apr 10, 201
jvrao wrote:
> Alexander Graf wrote:
>> On 12.04.2010, at 13:58, Jamie Lokier wrote:
>>
>>> Mohammed Gamal wrote:
On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 12:29 AM, Jamie Lokier wrote:
> Javier Guerra Giraldez wrote:
>> On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 7:42 AM, Mohammed Gamal
>> wrote:
>>> On Sat, Ap
Alexander Graf wrote:
> On 12.04.2010, at 13:58, Jamie Lokier wrote:
>
>> Mohammed Gamal wrote:
>>> On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 12:29 AM, Jamie Lokier wrote:
Javier Guerra Giraldez wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 7:42 AM, Mohammed Gamal
> wrote:
>> On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 2:12 PM,
Jamie Lokier wrote:
> Mohammed Gamal wrote:
>> 2- With respect to CIFS. I wonder how the shares are supposed to be
>> exposed to the guest. Should the Samba server be modified to be able
>> to use unix domain sockets instead of TCP ports and then QEMU
>> communicating on these sockets. With that ap
On 12.04.2010, at 13:58, Jamie Lokier wrote:
> Mohammed Gamal wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 12:29 AM, Jamie Lokier wrote:
>>> Javier Guerra Giraldez wrote:
On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 7:42 AM, Mohammed Gamal
wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 2:12 PM, Jamie Lokier wrote:
>> To
On 12.04.2010, at 14:04, Jamie Lokier wrote:
> Alexander Graf wrote:
>> Also since -net user does support samba exporting already,
>
> This I'm interested in. Last time I tried to use it, the "smb="
> option didn't work because Samba refused to run when launched with
> qemu's mini config file a
Alexander Graf wrote:
> Also since -net user does support samba exporting already,
This I'm interested in. Last time I tried to use it, the "smb="
option didn't work because Samba refused to run when launched with
qemu's mini config file and launched as a regular user. It needed
access to variou
Mohammed Gamal wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 12:29 AM, Jamie Lokier wrote:
> > Javier Guerra Giraldez wrote:
> >> On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 7:42 AM, Mohammed Gamal
> >> wrote:
> >> > On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 2:12 PM, Jamie Lokier
> >> > wrote:
> >> >> To throw a spanner in, the most widely sup
On 12.04.2010, at 10:15, Mohammed Gamal wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 12:29 AM, Jamie Lokier wrote:
>> Javier Guerra Giraldez wrote:
>>> On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 7:42 AM, Mohammed Gamal
>>> wrote:
On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 2:12 PM, Jamie Lokier wrote:
> To throw a spanner in, the mos
On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 12:29 AM, Jamie Lokier wrote:
> Javier Guerra Giraldez wrote:
>> On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 7:42 AM, Mohammed Gamal wrote:
>> > On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 2:12 PM, Jamie Lokier wrote:
>> >> To throw a spanner in, the most widely supported filesystem across
>> >> operating syste
Javier Guerra Giraldez wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 7:42 AM, Mohammed Gamal wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 2:12 PM, Jamie Lokier wrote:
> >> To throw a spanner in, the most widely supported filesystem across
> >> operating systems is probably NFS, version 2 :-)
> >
> > Remember that Windo
On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 7:42 AM, Mohammed Gamal wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 2:12 PM, Jamie Lokier wrote:
>> To throw a spanner in, the most widely supported filesystem across
>> operating systems is probably NFS, version 2 :-)
>
> Remember that Windows usage on a VM is not some rare use case
On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 2:12 PM, Jamie Lokier wrote:
> Mohammed Gamal wrote:
>> Hi Javier,
>> Thanks for the link. However, I'm still concerned with
>> interoperability with other operating systems, including non-Windows
>> ones. I am not sure of how many operating systems actually support 9p,
>>
Mohammed Gamal wrote:
> Hi Javier,
> Thanks for the link. However, I'm still concerned with
> interoperability with other operating systems, including non-Windows
> ones. I am not sure of how many operating systems actually support 9p,
> but I'm almost certain that CIFS would be more widely-support
On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 12:22 AM, Javier Guerra Giraldez
wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 5:17 PM, Mohammed Gamal wrote:
>> That's all good and well. The question now is which direction would
>> the community prefer to go. Would everyone be just happy with
>> virtio-9p passthrough? Would it suppor
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 5:17 PM, Mohammed Gamal wrote:
> That's all good and well. The question now is which direction would
> the community prefer to go. Would everyone be just happy with
> virtio-9p passthrough? Would it support multiple OSs (Windows comes to
> mind here)? Or would we eventually
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 11:22 PM, Jamie Lokier wrote:
> Mohammed Gamal wrote:
>> 2- With respect to CIFS. I wonder how the shares are supposed to be
>> exposed to the guest. Should the Samba server be modified to be able
>> to use unix domain sockets instead of TCP ports and then QEMU
>> communicat
Mohammed Gamal wrote:
> 2- With respect to CIFS. I wonder how the shares are supposed to be
> exposed to the guest. Should the Samba server be modified to be able
> to use unix domain sockets instead of TCP ports and then QEMU
> communicating on these sockets. With that approach, how should the
> g
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 7:11 PM, jvrao wrote:
> Luiz Capitulino wrote:
>> On Thu, 8 Apr 2010 18:01:01 +0200
>> Mohammed Gamal wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>> Now that Cam is almost done with his ivshmem patches, I was thinking
>>> of another idea for GSoC which is improving the pass-though
>>> filesystems.
Luiz Capitulino wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Apr 2010 18:01:01 +0200
> Mohammed Gamal wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> Now that Cam is almost done with his ivshmem patches, I was thinking
>> of another idea for GSoC which is improving the pass-though
>> filesystems.
>> I've got some questions on that:
>>
>> 1- What does
On Thu, 8 Apr 2010 18:01:01 +0200
Mohammed Gamal wrote:
> Hi,
> Now that Cam is almost done with his ivshmem patches, I was thinking
> of another idea for GSoC which is improving the pass-though
> filesystems.
> I've got some questions on that:
>
> 1- What does the community prefer to use and im
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 5:02 PM, Mohammed Gamal wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 6:01 PM, Mohammed Gamal wrote:
>> 1- What does the community prefer to use and improve? CIFS, 9p, or
>> both? And which is better taken up for GSoC.
There have been recent patches for filesystem passthrough using 9P:
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 6:01 PM, Mohammed Gamal wrote:
> Hi,
> Now that Cam is almost done with his ivshmem patches, I was thinking
> of another idea for GSoC which is improving the pass-though
> filesystems.
> I've got some questions on that:
>
> 1- What does the community prefer to use and improv
Hi,
Now that Cam is almost done with his ivshmem patches, I was thinking
of another idea for GSoC which is improving the pass-though
filesystems.
I've got some questions on that:
1- What does the community prefer to use and improve? CIFS, 9p, or
both? And which is better taken up for GSoC.
2- Wit
29 matches
Mail list logo
