From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LNZGX-0006lF-0C for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 15 Jan 2009 15:56:37 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LNZGV-0006kP-G6 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 15 Jan 2009 15:56:36 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=59252 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LNZGV-0006kJ-B1 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 15 Jan 2009 15:56:35 -0500 Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:53833) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LNZGU-0002WC-OC for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 15 Jan 2009 15:56:34 -0500 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (int-mx2.corp.redhat.com [172.16.27.26]) by mx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n0FKuX8l029265 for ; Thu, 15 Jan 2009 15:56:33 -0500 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id n0FKuX2Z031766 for ; Thu, 15 Jan 2009 15:56:33 -0500 Received: from dhcp-1-237.tlv.redhat.com (dhcp-1-237.tlv.redhat.com [10.35.1.237]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n0FKuWP5013282 for ; Thu, 15 Jan 2009 15:56:33 -0500 Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 22:54:59 +0200 From: Gleb Natapov Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] specify vmchannel as part of "user" net option Message-ID: <20090115205459.GA27165@redhat.com> References: <20090111151008.GL3267@redhat.com> <496F9B65.2030102@codemonkey.ws> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <496F9B65.2030102@codemonkey.ws> 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 Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 02:24:05PM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote: > Gleb Natapov wrote: >> To configure vmchannel and something like this to -net user: >> channels=;777:unix:/tmp/777,server >> > > I'd really like to avoid using ';' as a deliminator. Is the a more > clever way we can do this without it totally sucking? > I can't say I like it, but we can't use ',' and ':' as parsing will be ambiguous. So what's left? -- Gleb.