Hello Paul,
Wednesday, October 25, 2006, 6:01:48 PM, you wrote:
Oh, c'mon, Rob! I really didn't want to ask Paul Brook that, but
sure you'll fix my cluelessness right here, right now - tell me, tell me,
why Linux has dynamic-loadable modules support, which clueless passers-by
like me call
Hello Rob,
Thursday, October 26, 2006, 5:31:46 PM, you wrote:
On Wednesday 25 October 2006 11:01 am, Paul Brook wrote:
Oh, c'mon, Rob! I really didn't want to ask Paul Brook that, but
sure you'll fix my cluelessness right here, right now - tell me, tell me,
why Linux has
Linux has genuine reasons for wanting modules.
Kernel size is important because (a) it has to be loaded by the
bootloader, often from a small, slow device (eg. floppy, flash or
network).
(b) The whole kernel is permanently locked into ram. It you've ever tried
to build a kernel with
Hello Paul,
Ummm, I must be representing my ideas somewhat unclear... ;-)
Saturday, October 28, 2006, 3:08:20 AM, you wrote:
[]
Thanks for your response. But I hope none of us take the discussion
too seriously to consider the arguments like above are all-convincing.
They can be
Hi,
On Tue, 24 Oct 2006, Rob Landley wrote:
On Tuesday 24 October 2006 6:47 am, Flavio Visentin wrote:
At this point it's really cleaner and maybe simpler to use XML
Have you ever implemented a validating XML parser? I have. It only
_looks_ clean and simple.
+1
On Wednesday 25 October 2006 11:01 am, Paul Brook wrote:
Oh, c'mon, Rob! I really didn't want to ask Paul Brook that, but
sure you'll fix my cluelessness right here, right now - tell me, tell me,
why Linux has dynamic-loadable modules support, which clueless passers-by
like me call
Oh, c'mon, Rob! I really didn't want to ask Paul Brook that, but
sure you'll fix my cluelessness right here, right now - tell me, tell me,
why Linux has dynamic-loadable modules support, which clueless passers-by
like me call plugins? It must be closed-source diversion, no?
Linux has
IMHO, I believe:
- python inside monitor is uncalled for (average python installation size is
big, no ?)
- xml is still too big a format for something we can do by shell script
(joke: why not yaml ?)
--
Christian
___
Qemu-devel mailing list
On Monday 23 October 2006 7:33 pm, Paul Brook wrote:
My intention is that a machine config file would remove the motherboard
bits
altogether. ie. the config file describes everything that pc_init_1 does.
The
first half of pc.c would remain because that's device emulation.
Sounds highly
how about this ? (it's yaml, not xml)
the idea would be to store all cfg in one file and switch at boot time
which guest you want to boot...
This is just a draft, and your mileage may vary. More readings at:
http://yaml.org
http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/library/x-matters23.html
---
I'd recommend Qemu Launcher (https://gna.org/projects/qemulaunch).
If Qemu gets a config file and a configuration utility, it should be similar
in my opinion.
_
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's
On 10/24/06, Blue Swirl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd recommend Qemu Launcher (https://gna.org/projects/qemulaunch).
If Qemu gets a config file and a configuration utility, it should be similar
in my opinion.
I thought the qemu config file could be having the noble aim to be
multi-host. Using
On Monday 23 October 2006 8:12 pm, Paul Sokolovsky wrote:
Yes, machine config apparently would be a hierarchical structure,
with cross-references. And well, there's an industrial standard to
represent that - XML.
There's an interesting sort of natural selection at work in open source.
On Monday 23 October 2006 9:38 pm, Paul Sokolovsky wrote:
Maybe. But where are new chips in qemu? Why there're still only 2
ARM boards? How do I stick wi-fi card in one of them? So the concern
is not just if it's easy to add new devices or not, but if there're means
to actually support
On Tuesday 24 October 2006 6:47 am, Flavio Visentin wrote:
At this point it's really cleaner and maybe simpler to use XML
Have you ever implemented a validating XML parser? I have. It only
_looks_ clean and simple.
Rob
--
Perfection is reached, not when there is no longer anything to add,
Hello Rob,
Wednesday, October 25, 2006, 2:28:47 AM, you wrote:
On Monday 23 October 2006 9:38 pm, Paul Sokolovsky wrote:
Maybe. But where are new chips in qemu? Why there're still only 2
ARM boards? How do I stick wi-fi card in one of them? So the concern
is not just if it's easy to add
On 10/22/06, Rob Landley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As a random end-user, I really like being able to run qemu without a config
file, configuring it entirely on the command line. I'd be highly
disappointed if qemu turned into another Wine.
Rob
we've a lot to gain from it. Think twice: the
In my opinion config files should _always only_ be *an alternative* to a
long command line.
Basically you should be able to do anything with both configuration
options, be it command line or a config file (or a combination of both).
Ciao,
Jan
Christian MICHON schrieb:
On 10/22/06, Rob Landley
On Monday 23 October 2006 12:48, Jan Marten Simons wrote:
In my opinion config files should _always only_ be *an alternative* to a
long command line.
Basically you should be able to do anything with both configuration
options, be it command line or a config file (or a combination of both).
Rob Landley wrote:
On Wednesday 18 October 2006 2:42 pm, Chuck Brazie wrote:
Is there any work going on now to add config file support?
Chuck Brazie
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
As a random end-user, I really like being able to run qemu without a config
file, configuring it
On Sunday 22 October 2006 2:27 pm, Paul Brook wrote:
I've been considering a machine config file for a while, but haven't come up
with a coherent way of representing everything yet.
Do you at least have a list of everything that needs to be represented? (I
have a list but am fairly certain
On Monday 23 October 2006 21:01, Rob Landley wrote:
On Sunday 22 October 2006 2:27 pm, Paul Brook wrote:
I've been considering a machine config file for a while, but haven't come
up with a coherent way of representing everything yet.
Do you at least have a list of everything that needs to
On Monday 23 October 2006 1:50 pm, K. Richard Pixley wrote:
Rob Landley wrote:
On Wednesday 18 October 2006 2:42 pm, Chuck Brazie wrote:
Is there any work going on now to add config file support?
Chuck Brazie
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
As a random end-user, I really like being
On 10/23/06, K. Richard Pixley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What's the difference between a shell script to cover qemu and a
#!/bin/qemu config file?
Not everyone may run QEMU under a POSIX-ish command-line shell. There
are several active operating systems in the world, and several people
Seems to me they both address roughly the same
issues with roughly the same considerations.
Using a *.PIF file is the Windows way. Using the command line is Linux.
There's plenty of prior art for using config files on unix/linux systems.
I'm not saying we should remove all commandline
Rob Landley wrote:
What's the difference between a shell script to cover qemu and a
#!/bin/qemu config file?
The shell script works now, and you're proposing breaking it?
No, I'm not. I'm genuinely asking about functional differences.
Am I missing any
In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Rob Landley [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: Seems to me they both address roughly the same
: issues with roughly the same considerations.
:
: Using a *.PIF file is the Windows way. Using the command line is Linux.
Except for complicated things, like,
On Monday 23 October 2006 4:29 pm, Paul Brook wrote:
On Monday 23 October 2006 21:01, Rob Landley wrote:
On Sunday 22 October 2006 2:27 pm, Paul Brook wrote:
I've been considering a machine config file for a while, but haven't
come
up with a coherent way of representing everything yet.
Not really. I guess a generic key/value pair is sufficient for most
things (base address, model number, etc).
The things are what I was asking about. Assuming that QEMU has support for
the appropriate processor type, support for the right bus controller(s),
and support for various devices
On 24/10/06, Rob Landley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Monday 23 October 2006 4:29 pm, Paul Brook wrote:
On Monday 23 October 2006 21:01, Rob Landley wrote:
On Sunday 22 October 2006 2:27 pm, Paul Brook wrote:
I've been considering a machine config file for a while, but haven't
come
up
Hello Paul,
Monday, October 23, 2006, 11:29:52 PM, you wrote:
On Monday 23 October 2006 21:01, Rob Landley wrote:
On Sunday 22 October 2006 2:27 pm, Paul Brook wrote:
I've been considering a machine config file for a while, but haven't come
up with a coherent way of representing everything
The things are what I was asking about. Assuming that QEMU has support
for the appropriate processor type, support for the right bus
controller(s), and support for various devices that can attach to that
bus, what other information is needed to completely specify a machine?
(You
On Tuesday 24 October 2006 01:12, Paul Sokolovsky wrote:
Hello Paul,
Monday, October 23, 2006, 11:29:52 PM, you wrote:
On Monday 23 October 2006 21:01, Rob Landley wrote:
On Sunday 22 October 2006 2:27 pm, Paul Brook wrote:
I've been considering a machine config file for a while, but
I've been considering a machine config file for a while, but
haven't come up with a coherent way of representing everything yet.
I'm glad this discussion was brought up on the list. And I'd like
to also bring back another related issue - what about providing
plugin system for
Hi,
On Sat, 21 Oct 2006, Ricardo Almeida wrote:
Comments are always welcome, I guess, but since there is someone with
interest to implement config files, maybe constructive comments are
better :p
I don't dislike the use of xml nor I think is bloat.
You are free not to dislike the use of
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Johannes Schindelin wrote:
So _I_ think that it is just a matter of extending the command line option
parsing to also be able to parse a config file (in which case -- I am sure
even you agree) it is easier if one line holds a complete key/value
VMWare's config file style is really simple
ethernet0.present = TRUE
ethernet0.virtualDev = e1000
e1000bios.filename = path/etherboot-for-E1000
and it would be possible to
use VMWare's files with few or no changes.
Would that be enough to be able to move the emulated system
description into
Would that be enough to be able to move the emulated system
description into config files rather than having the set of hard-coded
machine alternatives we have at present? If so it would be a boon to
anyone wanting to emulate, frinstance, any ARM board other than those
manufactured by ARM
On Wednesday 18 October 2006 2:42 pm, Chuck Brazie wrote:
Is there any work going on now to add config file support?
Chuck Brazie
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
As a random end-user, I really like being able to run qemu without a config
file, configuring it entirely on the command line. I'd be highly
Hi,
Comments are always welcome, I guess, but since there is someone with
interest to implement config files, maybe constructive comments are
better :p
I don't dislike the use of xml nor I think is bloat. This subject as
been discuted in the list,
Hello,
maybe we should start with a collection of configuration options.
Of course, most command line options are configuration options,
but there are many more which are needed for special applications.
Different users of QEMU have quite different needs.
A simple example: I need to configure
On 10/20/06, Johannes Schindelin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The best of all, it's a Best Practice! Plus, you can write a DTD for it
and _validate_ it! Or even an _XML Schema_!
Don't forget: RelaxNG Compact Syntax :-)
___
Qemu-devel mailing list
Fabrice,
What are your ideas on the syntax of the config file? Will it be XML based
or similar to the current options?
Chuck Brazie
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
Qemu-devel mailing list
Qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Hi,
On Fri, 20 Oct 2006, Chuck Brazie wrote:
What are your ideas on the syntax of the config file? Will it be XML
based or similar to the current options?
Oh yes! *claps his hands* XML! *gets shiny eyes* We absolutely have not
enough bloat in QEmu! You could integrate libxml2. Or even
Is there any work going on now to add config file support?
Chuck Brazie
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
Qemu-devel mailing list
Qemu-devel@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel
45 matches
Mail list logo
