From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:39227) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eHs0H-0006Jx-3v for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 23 Nov 2017 08:57:22 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eHs0D-0008Ro-33 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 23 Nov 2017 08:57:21 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:53320) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eHs0C-0008RE-Sj for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 23 Nov 2017 08:57:17 -0500 Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2017 13:57:09 +0000 From: "Daniel P. Berrange" Message-ID: <20171123135709.GP8166@redhat.com> Reply-To: "Daniel P. Berrange" References: <1dff6d6c-be83-f6e1-2b7e-82d98bdb8a63@redhat.com> <6dd7061e-2ebe-7a51-8142-f67d5d75a81a@redhat.com> <8cd1c0b3-8386-d41e-ccfb-1a2073cdf4fb@redhat.com> <16011ac4-77c4-af75-5754-5f9586d6d629@redhat.com> <20171123130908.6ab004d3.cohuck@redhat.com> <20171123133924.60e9f616.cohuck@redhat.com> <1519a9dc-5f0b-7ddd-18ac-d1f33782656d@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] QEMU 3.0 ? List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Paolo Bonzini Cc: Peter Maydell , Cornelia Huck , Thomas Huth , =?utf-8?Q?C=C3=A9dric?= Le Goater , QEMU Developers , David Gibson , Greg Kurz , Markus Armbruster , Eric Blake , Philippe =?utf-8?Q?Mathieu-Daud=C3=A9?= , Sergio =?utf-8?B?QW5kcsOpcyBHw7NtZXo=?= Del Real , Alex Bligh On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 02:51:51PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 23/11/2017 14:13, Peter Maydell wrote: > > On 23 November 2017 at 13:02, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > >> In theory I don't like it either (and I hadn't thought about it until > >> today). In practice, qemu-kvm is not going away from > >> blogs/scripts/tutorials in a decade, so we might as well embrace it... > > Isn't this distro-specific? In ubuntu by default there isn't > > any wrapper, and if you do install the optional 'qemu-kvm' package > > the wrapper it provides is /usr/bin/kvm, not /usr/bin/qemu-kvm. > > Fedora also has no wrapper in the qemu-system-x86 package, and only > "qemu-kvm" installs one. In practice if you install the virtualization > package group you get it. What about Ubuntu? Actually not quite correct. Historically '/usr/bin/qemu-kvm' is provided by whichever 'qemu-system-$ARCH' RPM matches your name arch. With recent modularization, its now provided by 'qemu-system-$ARCH-core'. So everyone will have qemu-kvm if they've installed the sub-RPM matching their host arch. The 'qemu-kvm' RPM is just an empty RPM that depends on whichever 'qemu-system-$ARCH' matches your host, and thus provides '/usr/bin/qemu-kvm' This is just convenience to let downstream app RPMs depend on qemu-kvm instead of a big set of per-arch conditionals. Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|