On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 05:21:59PM +0200, Johannes Schauer wrote:
So if we agree on using environment variables to pass options to
qemu-user we next need to agree on how to name the options.
The following commandline arguments exist (in order as they are checked
in linux-user/main.c) and I
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 11:41:09AM +0300, Riku Voipio wrote:
On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 07:47:49AM +0200, josch wrote:
This could be avoided by setting the proposed environment variable
QEMU_LD_PREFIX to the just
created debian rootfs. As mentioned earlier, the usage of the -L option
is not
On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 05:52:50AM -0700, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
setting up a wrapper makes trivial cross-architecture chroots harder
as you'll have to copy two binaries into the chroot, and i'm not sure
if it would work at all, as the wrapper will need to somehow emulate
it's own
On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 07:47:49AM +0200, josch wrote:
This could be avoided by setting the proposed environment variable
QEMU_LD_PREFIX to the just
created debian rootfs. As mentioned earlier, the usage of the -L option
is not possible in this scenario because qemu-user is only implicitly
Hi,
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 11:41:09AM +0300, Riku Voipio wrote:
On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 07:47:49AM +0200, josch wrote:
This could be avoided by setting the proposed environment variable
QEMU_LD_PREFIX to the just
created debian rootfs. As mentioned earlier, the usage of the -L option
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 01:24:47PM +0200, Johannes Schauer wrote:
@Geert Stappers:
you are patching bsd-user/main.c and darwin-user/main.c as well. I take
it that you did test your changes on those platforms? does it work there
as well? I have no clue of darwin but is it really useful
6 matches
Mail list logo
