From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1GXLFG-0001kE-11 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 10 Oct 2006 13:18:22 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1GXLFE-0001jV-8I for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 10 Oct 2006 13:18:21 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GXLFE-0001jS-23 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 10 Oct 2006 13:18:20 -0400 Received: from [128.8.10.163] (helo=po1.wam.umd.edu) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1GXLN2-0004bO-Tl for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 10 Oct 2006 13:26:25 -0400 Received: from jbrown.mylinuxbox.org (jma-box.student.umd.edu [129.2.250.188]) by po1.wam.umd.edu (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k9AHIBpA020859 for ; Tue, 10 Oct 2006 13:18:11 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2006 13:18:10 -0400 From: "Jim C. Brown" Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] International Virtualization Conference Message-ID: <20061010171809.GA27303@jbrown.mylinuxbox.org> References: <20061008123019.94942.qmail@web52613.mail.yahoo.com> <200610090005.02895.rob@landley.net> <20061009120859.GA8917@jbrown.mylinuxbox.org> <200610101148.34187.rob@landley.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200610101148.34187.rob@landley.net> 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 Tue, Oct 10, 2006 at 11:48:33AM -0400, Rob Landley wrote: > > Here you are using the terms "virtual" and "emulated" interchangably. That's > > ok as long as the difference between virtualization and virtual/emulated is > > understood. > > Well, the hardware people see a huge difference. To them one is "doing it in > hardware" and the other is "doing it in software". > That is not how he uses the terms. He uses them interchangably. I was just trying to make clear the difference between emulation and virtualization. > > > If I follow your logic, then bochs is also a good canidate for the workshop. > > If you mean the way Hurd is a candidate for a workshop anywhere Linux is, > sure. I was trying to say that qemu (sans kqemu) is a bad candidate. Someone else explains the virtualization-vs-emulation thing much better than I could (short answer: VMware, kqemu, and other virtualizers do it in the hardware whie emulators like qemu and bochs do fully it in the software). > If it's a purely academic conference where being useful doesn't enter > into it. (I followed Bochs and Plex86 5 years ago, but could never actually > get them to do anything useful despite repeated attempts. Still haven't, > although I see Bochs is back from the dead...) Someone else pointed it out was more a corporate marketing gig. *shrug*. > > > -- > > And I'm sorry, but I find your tagline actively wrong: > > > Infinite complexity begets infinite beauty. > > It begets "unmaintainable" after about 5 minutes. > Natural complexity not human-made complexity :) Think fractals here. Or those pretty pictures we get when looking at subatomic particles. > > Infinite precision begets infinite perfection. > > You've never been micro-managed, have you? > Really not what I was referring to. :P > "Perfection is reached, not when there is no longer anything to add, but when > there is no longer anything to take away." > - Antoine de Saint-Exupery I agree. > > Rob > -- > "Perfection is reached, not when there is no longer anything to add, but when > there is no longer anything to take away." - Antoine de Saint-Exupery > -- Infinite complexity begets infinite beauty. Infinite precision begets infinite perfection.