On 07/29/2009 06:50 PM, Glauber Costa wrote:While I do understand the
value of backwards compatibility, we did change
behaviour of a number of things in the past. Example: "qemu" would print a help
message,
and now it runs without any disks. It changed people's script already.
There's a hu
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 04:43:11PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Alexander Graf wrote:
> > Avi Kivity wrote:
> >> On 07/29/2009 01:17 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >>> I just wonder now if/when qemu-kvm will switch over to the
> >>> kvm-by-default-off policy of upstream?
> >>>
> >> That will surely inco
Alexander Graf wrote:
> Avi Kivity wrote:
>> On 07/29/2009 01:17 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>> I just wonder now if/when qemu-kvm will switch over to the
>>> kvm-by-default-off policy of upstream?
>>>
>> That will surely inconvenience/surprise a lot of users.
>>
>> A migration path could be:
>>
>>
On 07/29/2009 03:28 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
Avi Kivity wrote:
On 07/29/2009 01:17 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
I just wonder now if/when qemu-kvm will switch over to the
kvm-by-default-off policy of upstream?
That will surely inconvenience/surprise a lot of users.
A migration pa
Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 07/29/2009 01:17 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> I just wonder now if/when qemu-kvm will switch over to the
>> kvm-by-default-off policy of upstream?
>>
>
> That will surely inconvenience/surprise a lot of users.
>
> A migration path could be:
>
> - add -accel
> - start warning
On 07/29/2009 01:17 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
I just wonder now if/when qemu-kvm will switch over to the
kvm-by-default-off policy of upstream?
That will surely inconvenience/surprise a lot of users.
A migration path could be:
- add -accel
- start warning when -accel is not used, encouraging
Alexander Graf wrote:
>
> On 28.07.2009, at 23:28, Glauber Costa wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 11:15:19PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>>
>>> On 28.07.2009, at 22:52, Glauber Costa wrote:
>>>
Falling back to tcg has proven to be evil through time. The option is
to
do not tr
On 28.07.2009, at 23:28, Glauber Costa wrote:
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 11:15:19PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 28.07.2009, at 22:52, Glauber Costa wrote:
Falling back to tcg has proven to be evil through time. The option
is
to
do not try to act behind user's back, and quit the program
On 28.07.2009, at 23:28, Glauber Costa wrote:
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 11:15:19PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 28.07.2009, at 22:52, Glauber Costa wrote:
Falling back to tcg has proven to be evil through time. The option
is
to
do not try to act behind user's back, and quit the progra
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 11:15:19PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
>
> On 28.07.2009, at 22:52, Glauber Costa wrote:
>
>> Falling back to tcg has proven to be evil through time. The option is
>> to
>> do not try to act behind user's back, and quit the program completely
>> if
>> we fail to initiali
On 28.07.2009, at 22:52, Glauber Costa wrote:
Falling back to tcg has proven to be evil through time. The option
is to
do not try to act behind user's back, and quit the program
completely if
we fail to initialize kvm. Right now, the only way to run tcg from
our tree
becomes explicitly a
On 28.07.2009, at 22:52, Glauber Costa wrote:
Falling back to tcg has proven to be evil through time. The option
is to
do not try to act behind user's back, and quit the program
completely if
we fail to initialize kvm. Right now, the only way to run tcg from
our tree
becomes explicitly a
Falling back to tcg has proven to be evil through time. The option is to
do not try to act behind user's back, and quit the program completely if
we fail to initialize kvm. Right now, the only way to run tcg from our tree
becomes explicitly asking for it, with the -no-kvm option.
But it will chang
13 matches
Mail list logo