From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IG1tu-00005m-OQ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 31 Jul 2007 20:17:18 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IG1tt-00005a-GJ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 31 Jul 2007 20:17:18 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IG1tt-00005W-BN for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 31 Jul 2007 20:17:17 -0400 Received: from phoenix.bawue.net ([193.7.176.60] helo=mail.bawue.net) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1IG1ts-0003y5-Vi for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 31 Jul 2007 20:17:17 -0400 Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2007 01:05:53 +0100 From: Thiemo Seufer Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] What is the best way to control qemu on a remote box? Message-ID: <20070801000553.GM26960@networkno.de> References: <811169.10529.qm@web54105.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <20070727175531.GD22232@hansmi.ch> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070727175531.GD22232@hansmi.ch> Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Michael Hanselmann Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Michael Hanselmann wrote: > On Fri, Jul 27, 2007 at 09:22:08AM -0700, n schembr wrote: > > Is system_powerdown a better way to stop the host? Is > > system_powerdown a soft operation like the atx powersupply? It did > > not work with a smoothwall guest. > > It would, but is not implemented for x86. I've been working on it using > ACPI, but gave up after an enquiry about IRQ handling on this list > hasn't been answered and a related patch has been ignored. I committed your patch, sorry for the delay. Thiemo