On Thu, 08/16 04:20, Max Reitz wrote: > No, the real issue is that dd is still not implemented just as a > frontend to convert. Which it should be. I'm not sure dd was a very > good idea from the start, and now it should ideally be a frontend to > convert. > > (My full opinion on the matter: dd has a horrible interface. I don't > quite see why we replicated that inside qemu-img. Also, if you want to > use dd, why not use qemu-nbd + Linux nbd device + real dd?)
The intention is that dd is a familiar interface and allows for operating on portions of images. It is much more convenient than "qemu-nbd + Linux nbd + dd" and a bit more convenient than "booting a Linux VM, attaching the image as a virtual disk, then use dd in the guest". More so when writing tests. Fam
