On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 10:43 AM, Dustin Kirkland <[email protected]>wrote:
> > Hi- > > At this point, we have no intention on touching the kqemu package > (which is separate from qemu). And the qemu-kvm version we're using > in Karmic is 0.11, which still supports kqemu. > > However, upstream has completely dropped kqemu support in 0.12, so I > wouldn't plan on having kqemu support beyond Karmic. See the qemu > mailing lists for *lengthy* discussion on this topic, which I'd rather > not duplicate here. > > :-Dustin > After some searching, I think this must be the discussion you are talking about: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2009-02/msg00295.html I'm linking it here in case anyone else is interested. From that discussion and reading elsewhere, it sounds like VirtualBox may be the forward solution to virtualization on non-vmx/non-svm hardware. Does Canonical or any Ubuntu virt developers have any concern for virtualization on non-vmx/non-svm hardware? And what do you (they, anyone) think of vbox as the Ubuntu solution to fill this void? Brazen
-- ubuntu-server mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
