On Mon, May 04, 2009 at 08:15:58AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote: > Edgar E. Iglesias wrote: >> I don't feel very strongly about it but my gut feeling tells me we >> shouldn't be doing this. >> > > We have to. It's not just KVM, it's virtio, tun/tap, and as we add more > things to the Linux kernel to support QEMU, it'll just grow larger.
I'm not sure we have too. QEMU users that build from source can IMO be expected to update kernel headers if required and if our configure is explicit about it. "You didn't get feature x because you have an old kernel or old kernel headers" kind of warning. Another alternative is to provide an option so users can specify where to find alternative kernel-headers. IIRC other I've seen this approach in several other projects. I agree with you that the compat ifdefs are annoying though... > This is how applications are supposed to use kernel headers. It's > unpleasant, but that's just the way Linux is today. Do you mean that all apps using linux header files should bring those in? Cheers -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
