Riku Voipio riku.voi...@iki.fi wrote on 2014/09/01 11:51:15:
On Mon, Sep 01, 2014 at 10:12:18AM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
On 1 September 2014 09:51, Paolo Bonzini pbonz...@redhat.com wrote:
Il 29/08/2014 20:01, Peter Maydell ha scritto:
[cc'ing MJT for more distro opinion since I
On 17 September 2014 08:34, Joakim Tjernlund
joakim.tjernl...@transmode.se wrote:
Did this go anywhere ? Is there a solution in sight?
I was hoping for more distro input, but absent that:
Does anybody care to try to float the idea of an API
extension to the binfmt stuff to pass us the argv0
Il 17/09/2014 18:12, Peter Maydell ha scritto:
On 17 September 2014 08:34, Joakim Tjernlund
joakim.tjernl...@transmode.se wrote:
Did this go anywhere ? Is there a solution in sight?
I was hoping for more distro input, but absent that:
Does anybody care to try to float the idea of an API
On 17 September 2014 12:25, Paolo Bonzini pbonz...@redhat.com wrote:
Il 17/09/2014 18:12, Peter Maydell ha scritto:
Does anybody care to try to float the idea of an API
extension to the binfmt stuff to pass us the argv0
out-of-band (eg via an elf auxv vector entry if some
new binfmt flag is
Il 29/08/2014 20:01, Peter Maydell ha scritto:
[cc'ing MJT for more distro opinion since I think fundamentally
the choice we ought to make upstream is what's not going to
screw over distros... Paolo, is there a RedHat QEMU maintainer
who would have an opinion here?]
There's Cole Robinson.
On 1 September 2014 09:51, Paolo Bonzini pbonz...@redhat.com wrote:
Il 29/08/2014 20:01, Peter Maydell ha scritto:
[cc'ing MJT for more distro opinion since I think fundamentally
the choice we ought to make upstream is what's not going to
screw over distros... Paolo, is there a RedHat QEMU
Il 01/09/2014 11:12, Peter Maydell ha scritto:
We'd just add Ps and we'd be fine.
But this would break all your existing users' existing
chroot setups. That's the question I'm after an answer to:
what do you (as a distro) think would be acceptable as
transitional breakage, if anything?
On 1 September 2014 10:28, Paolo Bonzini pbonz...@redhat.com wrote:
Il 01/09/2014 11:12, Peter Maydell ha scritto:
We'd just add Ps and we'd be fine.
But this would break all your existing users' existing
chroot setups. That's the question I'm after an answer to:
what do you (as a distro)
On Mon, Sep 01, 2014 at 10:12:18AM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
On 1 September 2014 09:51, Paolo Bonzini pbonz...@redhat.com wrote:
Il 29/08/2014 20:01, Peter Maydell ha scritto:
[cc'ing MJT for more distro opinion since I think fundamentally
the choice we ought to make upstream is what's
Peter Maydell peter.mayd...@linaro.org wrote on 2014/08/29 20:01:12:
.
What I really would like is a way for the kernel to tell the
interpreter binary what particular mangling it's chosen to do
of the command line arguments. Then we could have one
binary that coped in both situations
[cc'ing MJT for more distro opinion since I think fundamentally
the choice we ought to make upstream is what's not going to
screw over distros... Paolo, is there a RedHat QEMU maintainer
who would have an opinion here?]
On 25 August 2014 10:09, Riku Voipio riku.voi...@iki.fi wrote:
After
Any resolution for how to handle P flag yet?
Jocke
Joakim Tjernlund/Transmode wrote on 2014/08/25 17:02:42:
Riku Voipio riku.voi...@iki.fi wrote on 2014/08/25 16:49:17:
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 04:30:40PM +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
Riku Voipio riku.voi...@iki.fi wrote on
Hi,
After weekend, I think the solution to using the P flag is to
go back to Joakim's original patch:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2014-07/msg02269.html
With this, we get:
If you continue to use qemu-x-static in your binfmt_misc registration,
nothing changes - both old and new
On 25.08.14 11:09, Riku Voipio wrote:
Hi,
After weekend, I think the solution to using the P flag is to
go back to Joakim's original patch:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2014-07/msg02269.html
With this, we get:
If you continue to use qemu-x-static in your binfmt_misc
Alexander Graf ag...@suse.de wrote on 2014/08/25 11:14:58:
On 25.08.14 11:09, Riku Voipio wrote:
Hi,
After weekend, I think the solution to using the P flag is to
go back to Joakim's original patch:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2014-07/msg02269.html
With this,
On 25.08.14 14:42, Riku Voipio wrote:
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 11:14:58AM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 25.08.14 11:09, Riku Voipio wrote:
Hi,
After weekend, I think the solution to using the P flag is to
go back to Joakim's original patch:
Le 25 août 2014 à 14:46, Alexander Graf ag...@suse.de a écrit :
On 25.08.14 14:42, Riku Voipio wrote:
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 11:14:58AM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 25.08.14 11:09, Riku Voipio wrote:
Hi,
After weekend, I think the solution to using the P flag is to
go
Riku Voipio riku.voi...@iki.fi wrote on 2014/08/25 14:42:57:
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 11:14:58AM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 25.08.14 11:09, Riku Voipio wrote:
Hi,
After weekend, I think the solution to using the P flag is to
go back to Joakim's original patch:
Hi,
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 03:39:19PM +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
Then consider when you run a LXC without P flag.
Please remember that your usecase of running Qemu in LXC is a new feature,
never before supported. Adding new features is always nice. However, it must
not happen with expense
Riku Voipio riku.voi...@iki.fi wrote on 2014/08/25 15:55:55:
Hi,
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 03:39:19PM +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
Then consider when you run a LXC without P flag.
Please remember that your usecase of running Qemu in LXC is a new
feature,
never before supported.
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 04:30:40PM +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
Riku Voipio riku.voi...@iki.fi wrote on 2014/08/25 15:55:55:
Hi,
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 03:39:19PM +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
Then consider when you run a LXC without P flag.
Please remember that your
Riku Voipio riku.voi...@iki.fi wrote on 2014/08/25 16:49:17:
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 04:30:40PM +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
Riku Voipio riku.voi...@iki.fi wrote on 2014/08/25 15:55:55:
Hi,
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 03:39:19PM +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
Then consider
22 matches
Mail list logo
