Current status of UML development?

Current status of UML development?

[Dimitry Golubovsky]

Hi,

I am learning/experimenting with UML internals, and am curious what is
the current status of its development? Has UML become stable enough so
it does not need any improvement (at least for i386), or has its
development just ceased in favor of other virtualization techniques?

Also I am trying to find recent papers covering modern UML's principles of
functioning (especially the skas0 mode when /proc/mm is not
available), but most of the papers that Google returns date back to
2001 - 2003, and often state that "each UML process gets its own host
process" that does not seem correct these days.

Thanks for any hints.

-- 
Dimitry Golubovsky

Anywhere on the Web

Re: Current status of UML development?

[Américo Wang]

On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 03:27:58PM -0500, Dimitry Golubovsky wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I am learning/experimenting with UML internals, and am curious what is
>the current status of its development? Has UML become stable enough so
>it does not need any improvement (at least for i386), or has its
>development just ceased in favor of other virtualization techniques?
>

Of course not.

>Also I am trying to find recent papers covering modern UML's principles of
>functioning (especially the skas0 mode when /proc/mm is not
>available), but most of the papers that Google returns date back to
>2001 - 2003, and often state that "each UML process gets its own host
>process" that does not seem correct these days.
>

Yeah, I think we still don't have a fully support for that,
welcome to work on it.

Thanks.


-- 
Live like a child, think like the god.
 

Re: Current status of UML development?

[Jeff Dike]

On Sat, Jan 23, 2010 at 12:23:56AM +0800, Américo Wang wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 03:27:58PM -0500, Dimitry Golubovsky wrote:
> >I am learning/experimenting with UML internals, and am curious what is
> >the current status of its development? Has UML become stable enough so
> >it does not need any improvement (at least for i386), or has its
> >development just ceased in favor of other virtualization techniques?
> >
> 
> Of course not.

This is being generous.  I haven't really done any work on UML in the
last year or so, although bugs are found and patches contributed (by
Américo, among others).

				Jeff

Re: Current status of UML development?

[Américo Wang]

On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 12:11:45PM -0500, Jeff Dike wrote:
>On Sat, Jan 23, 2010 at 12:23:56AM +0800, Américo Wang wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 03:27:58PM -0500, Dimitry Golubovsky wrote:
>> >I am learning/experimenting with UML internals, and am curious what is
>> >the current status of its development? Has UML become stable enough so
>> >it does not need any improvement (at least for i386), or has its
>> >development just ceased in favor of other virtualization techniques?
>> >
>> 
>> Of course not.
>
>This is being generous.  I haven't really done any work on UML in the
>last year or so, although bugs are found and patches contributed (by
>Américo, among others).
>

Oh, seems you are busy. If you want I can take UML patches for you.
But of course, I need kind help from you and others.

Thanks.