On 07/05/13 19:06, Tomoki Sekiyama wrote:
> On 7/4/13 8:54 , "Paolo Bonzini" <pbonz...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> Il 03/07/2013 18:19, Tomoki Sekiyama ha scritto:
>>> On 7/3/13 11:58 , "Paolo Bonzini" <pbonz...@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Il 03/07/2013 17:49, Tomoki Sekiyama ha scritto:
>>>>> - return ga_install_service(path, log_filepath,
>>>>> fixed_state_dir);
>>>>> + if (ga_install_vss_provider()) {
>>>>> + return EXIT_FAILURE;
>>>>> + }
>>>>> + if (ga_install_service(path, log_filepath,
>>>>> fixed_state_dir)) {
>>>>> + ga_uninstall_vss_provider();
>>>>> + return EXIT_FAILURE;
>>>>> + }
>>>>> + return 0;
>>>>> } else if (strcmp(service, "uninstall") == 0) {
>>>>> + ga_uninstall_vss_provider();
>>>>> return ga_uninstall_service();
>>>>
>>>> I think this shouldn't be a hard failure. Only the freeze/thaw
>>>> commands
>>>> should fail.
>>>>
>>>> Paolo
>>>
>>> Do you mean that qemu-ga should work without qga-provider.dll etc.
>>> even if it is configured --with-vss-sdk ?
>>
>> Yes, and I'm even wondering if we should move all VSS code to a DLL
>> (provider and requestor---they are very tied to each other anyway
>> because of hEventFrozen/hEventThaw), and have qemu-ga simply look for
>> qga-provider.dll dropped into the executable directory.
>>
>> Then qemu-ga can look for it even if it is not configured --with-vss-sdk.
>
> Hm, that sounds reasonable.
>
> I will try on moving the requestor into qga-provider.dll at next
> iteration.
Is it OK with you if I skip reviewing v5 then? If the v5->v6
reorganization is going to be intrusive (ie. I won't be able to do a
patch-by-patch interdiff), then I'd prefer skipping v5.
Thanks,
Laszlo
