2011/1/29 Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com>: > On 01/29/2011 10:31 AM, Yoshiaki Tamura wrote: >> >> OK, then while keeping "-incoming kemari:tcp:<host>:<port>" as a >> strong solution, could you please explain why placing the original >> parser under tcp handler wasn't a good idea? With that, >> -incoming exec .*,ft_mode shouldn't be a problem. > > But a hypothetical -incoming unix.*,ft_mode would have to be implemented > twice.
You mean Kemari should be able to use with unix domain sockets, or other local communication patch? Since Kemari needs two remote hosts, I don't see why need to use unix domain sockets except for testing. Maybe I'm missing the point :) Yoshi > > Paolo > -- > 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 > -- 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
