On Sep 5, 2012 14:38 "Stuart Winter" wrote:
> > Yeah, I'd miss it too... I still use qemu with its snapshot feature
> > to
> > build packages on a "clean" installation.
> > My real ARM hardware has too many packages installed to consider it
> > a
> > clean installation.
>
> I had a look and real
On 6 September 2012 17:20, John O'Donnell wrote:
> On 09/06/2012 06:04 AM, Ottavio Caruso wrote:
>>
>> On 6 September 2012 09:25, Cédric VINCENT
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> For information, QEMU user-mode doesn't require any "guest" kernel
>>> since all privileged operations are redirected to the "host
On 09/06/2012 06:04 AM, Ottavio Caruso wrote:
On 6 September 2012 09:25, Cédric VINCENT wrote:
For information, QEMU user-mode doesn't require any "guest" kernel
since all privileged operations are redirected to the "host" one.
You assume that everybody uses Linux on PC as a host. If you use
>> For information, QEMU user-mode doesn't require any "guest" kernel
>> since all privileged operations are redirected to the "host" one.
>You assume that everybody uses Linux on PC as a host. If you use
>Windows for example you need full system emulation.
I just could not resist ... this is j
On 6 September 2012 09:25, Cédric VINCENT wrote:
>
> For information, QEMU user-mode doesn't require any "guest" kernel
> since all privileged operations are redirected to the "host" one.
You assume that everybody uses Linux on PC as a host. If you use
Windows for example you need full system emu
Hello,
For information, QEMU user-mode doesn't require any "guest" kernel
since all privileged operations are redirected to the "host" one.
Moreover the user-mode is a lot faster than the system-mode since
there's no device emulation at all [0].
Let me demonstrate how you can use your favorite di
> Yeah, I'd miss it too... I still use qemu with its snapshot feature to
> build packages on a "clean" installation.
> My real ARM hardware has too many packages installed to consider it a
> clean installation.
I had a look and realised that to remove all the references to Versatile,
and test the
On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 11:37 AM, Robby Workman wrote:
> On Fri, 31 Aug 2012 07:09:33 -0700 (PDT)
> Stuart Winter wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> I am thinking about removing the QEMU packages from -current.
>> I only added these years ago because my real ARM hardware died and I
>> needed a stop gap.
>>
> and you can add gobs of RAM SWAP support in qeum that isnt available to the
> real hardware.
The machine type I provide packages for is the VersatilePB which only
supports 256MB RAM, and you certainly would not want it paging.
--
Stuart Winter
Slackware ARM: www.armedslack.org
___
On 08/31/2012 11:05 AM, Davide wrote:
I still find qemu useful when I want to test something out amd that qould be
emulating ARM from x86 hardware.
I know arm hardware is cheap nowadays ... but qemu is cheaper and no need to
wait for shipping ;)
and you can add gobs of RAM SWAP support in qeum
On 31 August 2012 16:22, Stuart Winter wrote:
>
>> I don't understand what you mean by qemu packages. Do you mean the
>> /slackwarearm/slackwarearm-devtools/qemu/ ?
>
> The 'versatile' kernel packages.
Then in this case, yes, I'd still like to play with them if possible.
_
> I don't understand what you mean by qemu packages. Do you mean the
> /slackwarearm/slackwarearm-devtools/qemu/ ?
The 'versatile' kernel packages.
--
Stuart Winter
Slackware ARM: www.armedslack.org
___
ARMedslack mailing list
ARMedslack@lists.armeds
On 31 August 2012 15:09, Stuart Winter wrote:
>
> I am thinking about removing the QEMU packages from -current.
> I only added these years ago because my real ARM hardware died and I
> needed a stop gap.
I don't understand what you mean by qemu packages. Do you mean the
/slackwarearm/slackwarearm
Inviato: Venerdì 31 Agosto 2012 16:09
Oggetto: [ARMedslack] QEMU support - does anybody care about it?
Hi
I am thinking about removing the QEMU packages from -current.
I only added these years ago because my real ARM hardware died and I
needed a stop gap.
The thing is that QEMU is *so slow
On Fri, 31 Aug 2012 07:09:33 -0700 (PDT)
Stuart Winter wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> I am thinking about removing the QEMU packages from -current.
> I only added these years ago because my real ARM hardware died and I
> needed a stop gap.
>
> The thing is that QEMU is *so slow* that I cannot imagine it be
I've never used QEMU and I think nowadays ARM hardware is really cheap
to get. So even for a first try beginners may rather buy an ARM board
than using QEMU.
2012/8/31 Stuart Winter :
>
> Hi
>
> I am thinking about removing the QEMU packages from -current.
> I only added these years ago because m
Hi
I am thinking about removing the QEMU packages from -current.
I only added these years ago because my real ARM hardware died and I
needed a stop gap.
The thing is that QEMU is *so slow* that I cannot imagine it being useful
at all, apart from a 10 minute novelty for x86 users.
It takes time t
17 matches
Mail list logo
