From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1D0NTe-00071s-63 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 13 Feb 2005 12:24:11 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1D0NTV-0006y4-Qx for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 13 Feb 2005 12:24:04 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1D0NTU-0006uX-P2 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 13 Feb 2005 12:24:00 -0500 Received: from [128.8.10.163] (helo=po1.wam.umd.edu) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1D0N7p-0002o2-V7 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 13 Feb 2005 12:01:38 -0500 Received: from jbrown.mylinuxbox.org (jma-box.student.umd.edu [129.2.237.180]) by po1.wam.umd.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id j1DH1bG1010523 for ; Sun, 13 Feb 2005 12:01:37 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2005 12:01:36 -0500 From: "Jim C. Brown" Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] FreeOSZoo will stop March 1, 2005 Message-ID: <20050213170136.GB28580@jbrown.mylinuxbox.org> References: <200502121018.09039.jm@poure.com> <420DD7F8.5080805@wasp.net.au> <8c93d882b06fc13db0eda968a8f261ec@axiros.com> <420E07E2.5090106@wasp.net.au> <345371aff0fb0626b3d6f11161d57ad0@axiros.com> <118123041.20050212191149@ena.si> <715d3905bcba4149077ab7c26f09737c@axiros.com> <67341562.20050213010610@ena.si> <0850c4d1c941ac7338f58d0a658876e7@axiros.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In-Reply-To: <0850c4d1c941ac7338f58d0a658876e7@axiros.com> Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Sun, Feb 13, 2005 at 12:28:03PM +0100, Daniel Egger wrote: > On 13.02.2005, at 01:06, Jernej Simon??i?? wrote: >=20 > >>If you only intend to run Linux VMs and don't have a problem > >>patching the kernel sources this is a very viable approach to > >>get something which is not possible anymore *without* kqemu > >>which is more flexible but does only run on 32bit kernels ATM. > > > >You don't understand - I was asking what are you loosing with "new"=20 > >Qemu > >without the kernel module compared to Qemu before the kernel module was > >introduced. I know that with the kernel module Qemu runs much faster,=20 > >but if > >you don't want to use it due to it's licence, you haven't lost anything > >compared to before the module was available. Or have you? >=20 > Please do read the mails before responding. >=20 > qemu-fast is the key point which you're obviously missing. >=20 > Servus, > Daniel I read the email ... I got the impression that qemu-fast wasn't good enough either and thus there was no alternative to kqemu. To end this debate once and for all, I'd like to announce that I've begun w= ork on getting qemu to use the plex86 kernel module. (Lucky for me I use a 2.4 kernel.) Anyone who is mad that kqemu is closed source, feel free to email = me privately and help me make the necessary changes. > _______________________________________________ > Qemu-devel mailing list > Qemu-devel@nongnu.org > http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel --=20 Infinite complexity begets infinite beauty. Infinite precision begets infinite perfection.