Re: KVM call for 2017-03-14

Peter Maydell
2017-03-14T10:56:58Z

On 14 March 2017 at 09:59, Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com> wrote:
> Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> wrote:
>> On 14 March 2017 at 09:13, Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 11:02:01AM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
>>> The minimum requirements for the new language:
>>> 1. Does it support the host operating systems that QEMU runs on?
>>> 2. Does it support the host architectures that QEMU runs on?
>>
>> Speaking of this, I was thinking that we should introduce
>> a rule that for any host OS/arch we support we must have
>> a build machine so we can at least do a compile test.
>> For instance if you believe configure we support Solaris
>> and AIX, but I bet they're bit-rotting. The ia64 backend
>> has to be a strong candidate for being dumped too.
>> Demanding "system we can test on or we drop support"
>> would let us more clearly see what we're actually running
>> on and avoid unnecessarily ruling things out because they
>> don't support Itanium or AIX...
>
> YES, YES and YES.
>
> I demand an osX build machine NOW!!!! Remote access is ok.

OSX is actually in the set that's OK because I have a
machine I can test on. The ones that are problems are
all the BSDs, AIX, Solaris, Haiku, and architectures
sparc, mips, ia64, s390.

thanks
-- PMM