From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Anthony Liguori Subject: VM-Tools 0.0.2 Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2005 22:20:40 -0600 Message-ID: <42181018.9060808@us.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xen-devel-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: xen-devel-admin@lists.sourceforge.net List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: To: xen-devel@lists.sourceforge.net List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Hi all, I've posted an updated version of VM-Tools. This version doesn't have many user-visible changes but is almost a complete rewrite. VM-Tools is slowly become what it is intended to be, a small library that provides high level APIs for managing Xen with some example command line tools. This version includes a first pass at a library abstraction, a simple (and incomplete) Python binding using Pyrex, buffered console support, a virtual device abstraction (that's designed to eventually support DSOs), and lots of bug fixes. This version still has some issues and I wouldn't recommend using it for production use but it's been used by a few people without any sort of data corruption. One of the things I'd really like to see is a standard higher-level library and virtual device layer that was used by all tools (vm-tools, Xend, etc.). What does everyone else think? Is the VM-Tools library too high level for use in something like Xend? As usually, I'd greatly appreciate any feedback on the tools/library. http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/aliguori/vm-tools-0.0.2.tar.gz Regards, Anthony Liguori ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click