On 18/01/2017 13:58, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 01:55:21PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 18/01/2017 13:52, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
Though maybe we should just remove .conf file support completely...
who's using it?!?
>>> You mean removing
On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 10:17:17AM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>
> On 17/01/2017 19:00, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> > The existing default_config_files table in arch_init.c has a
> > single entry, making it completely unnecessary. The whole code
> > can be replaced by a single
On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 10:17:17AM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>
> On 17/01/2017 19:00, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> > The existing default_config_files table in arch_init.c has a
> > single entry, making it completely unnecessary. The whole code
> > can be replaced by a single
On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 01:55:21PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>
> On 18/01/2017 13:52, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> >>
> >> Though maybe we should just remove .conf file support completely...
> >> who's using it?!?
> > You mean removing /etc/qemu.conf, or removing -readconfig
> > completely?
> >
On 18/01/2017 13:52, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
>>
>> Though maybe we should just remove .conf file support completely...
>> who's using it?!?
> You mean removing /etc/qemu.conf, or removing -readconfig
> completely?
>
> The former doesn't seem to be used often. The latter looks very
> useful for
On 17/01/2017 19:00, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> The existing default_config_files table in arch_init.c has a
> single entry, making it completely unnecessary. The whole code
> can be replaced by a single qemu_read_config_file() call in vl.c.
>
> Signed-off-by: Eduardo Habkost
