On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 12:58 PM, Steve Fosdick
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Guys,
>
> If I run Linux kernel 2.6.24.3 and then start a qemu virtual machine running
> Windows XP as the guest operating system the CPU usage is high, always close
> to 100%, and the virtual machine slower than normal.
2007/10/22, Stefan Weil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Ivan Kalvachev schrieb:
> > According to http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa365171.aspx
> >
> > this function requires Win XP or Vista.
> > Is qemu supported only on these?
> Good question. The old IOCT
2007/10/19, Stefan Weil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hi,
>
> raw harddisk access for Windows (//./PhysicalDrive0) gives wrong disk sizes.
> You can check this by booting a harddisk with the GRUB bootloader installed
> and using GRUB's geometry command.
>
> The current QEMU code uses IOCTL_DISK_GET_DRIVE_
2007/10/17, Ricardo Almeida <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hi,
>
> I've sent a message 4 days ago but got no answer :(
>
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2007-10/msg00314.html
>
> From: Ricardo Almeida
> Subject:[Qemu-devel] fat rw
> Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2007 23:50:17 +0100
>
> Hi,
>
2007/9/24, Johannes Schindelin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hi,
> On Mon, 24 Sep 2007, Ivan Kalvachev wrote:
[...]
> > I believe that I've answered and addressed all your comments.
>
> Ooops. I think I mixed up your patch with the other patch for vvfat that
> floated aro
2007/9/24, Johannes Schindelin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, 24 Sep 2007, Ivan Kalvachev wrote:
>
> > I had a discussion with Johannes Schindelin over my patch, that I
> > thought is on the maillist, but apparently it wasn't. I'm subscribed, so
I had a discussion with Johannes Schindelin over my patch, that I
thought is on the maillist, but apparently it wasn't. I'm subscribed,
so please don't send me mails directly, gmail web interface could be
quite misleading.
So here is the third revision of my patch. Changes include:
using more stru
Hello,
I've been having problems using vvfat virtual block device.
Even linux fdisk was able to find problems with it.
The reason turned out to be simple, MBR have bogus parameters.
1. Partition size in sectors is threated as partition end,
causing the partition to have the same size as the devic
