From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1D0Oqj-0005bo-EH for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 13 Feb 2005 13:52:06 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1D0OqW-0005UN-44 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 13 Feb 2005 13:51:54 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1D0OqQ-0005PA-CU for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 13 Feb 2005 13:51:47 -0500 Received: from [128.8.10.164] (helo=po2.wam.umd.edu) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1D0OT1-00082U-KH for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 13 Feb 2005 13:27:35 -0500 Received: from jbrown.mylinuxbox.org (jma-box.student.umd.edu [129.2.237.180]) by po2.wam.umd.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id j1DIRYpT017057 for ; Sun, 13 Feb 2005 13:27:35 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2005 13:27:34 -0500 From: "Jim C. Brown" Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Plex86 and Qemu Message-ID: <20050213182734.GA29432@jbrown.mylinuxbox.org> References: <200502121018.09039.jm@poure.com> <20050213170136.GB28580@jbrown.mylinuxbox.org> <001e01c511f3$1aae1ab0$254d21d1@computername> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <001e01c511f3$1aae1ab0$254d21d1@computername> 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 11:40:21AM -0600, jeebs@yango.us wrote: > From: "Jim C. Brown" > > >To end this debate once and for all, I'd like to announce that I've begun work > >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. > > Question... > > Which version of Plex86 are you talking about? The original one now at Savannah, or the Plex86 v2 at SourceForge? v2 > > The reason I'm asking is that I use Windows, not Linux. I can tell by the length of lines in your email. ;) > And I'm usually wanting to run OS's other than Linux. (Dos, Win98, WinXP.) (And I usually get the semi-daily build off FreeOSZoo, since it's easier to do that than to build it myself.) > > Therefor Fabrice's new module is useless to me. Nice idea etc., but utterly useless to me. Mine will be too, unless someone ports plex86 to Windows. > > Plex86 v2 is also Linux only, and requires patched guest kernels. My idea is to use the module in cosimulation. This would not require a patch guest kernel and would allow for any guest OS to be used, not just linux. > > I think the original version was for any OS, wasn't it? But it was never stable, was it? Hence the reason it was abandoned. > > And others, such as CoLinux, are also linux only. (And require patched kernal or host.) > I use v2 because the original version is not stable enough, and in fact has extra code that I don't need (to handle virtalization of ring 0, hardware emulation, and so on). v2 also has extra code that isn't needed (I/O space, HAL, and so on), so someone else is writing a replacement kqemu module from scratch. > > Anyway, the point I'm making (and asking about) is that the majority of potential users are either going to run Windows as the guest, or as the host.. (And possibly both.) Mine will support using Windows as guest, but not as host. > > So for the majority of people, for the majority of cases, it seems like most of these 'fast emulator' projects are useless... Nice idea and such, but not really helpful. > > So... is your idea going to be helpful to the majority of potential users? > Yes. It will let linux2.4 users run Windows and Windows apps. > > > > _______________________________________________ > Qemu-devel mailing list > Qemu-devel@nongnu.org > http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel > -- Infinite complexity begets infinite beauty. Infinite precision begets infinite perfection.