From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LoRoN-0000Ag-06 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 30 Mar 2009 20:26:39 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LoRoM-0000AS-EK for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 30 Mar 2009 20:26:38 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=47581 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LoRoM-0000AP-87 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 30 Mar 2009 20:26:38 -0400 Received: from static-71-162-243-5.phlapa.fios.verizon.net ([71.162.243.5]:60009 helo=grelber.thyrsus.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LoRoL-0007C5-TE for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 30 Mar 2009 20:26:38 -0400 From: Rob Landley Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] ANNOUNCE: Release 0.10.1 of QEMU Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2009 19:25:03 -0500 References: <49C57763.8040904@codemonkey.ws> <200903241607.34007.rob@landley.net> <49C94E8E.30202@codemonkey.ws> In-Reply-To: <49C94E8E.30202@codemonkey.ws> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200903301925.04230.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: Anthony Liguori Cc: kvm-devel , qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Tuesday 24 March 2009 16:20:14 Anthony Liguori wrote: > Rob Landley wrote: > > On Saturday 21 March 2009 18:25:23 Anthony Liguori wrote: > >> The QEMU team is pleased to announce the availability of the 0.10.1 > >> release. This is a stable release of the 0.10 tree and contains only > >> bug fixes since the 0.10.0. The attached Changelog includes all of the > >> changes that have went in since 0.10.0. > >> > >> It can be downloaded from Savannah at: > >> > >> http://savannah.nongnu.org/download/qemu/qemu-0.10.1.tar.gz > > > > This doesn't include a fix powerpc -nographic (either by reverting to the > > previous openbios-ppc or by upgrading to current OpenBios svn): > > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2009-03/msg01070.html > > > > Nor does it include the fix for sh4 -append: > > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2009-02/msg00727.html > > Part of my criteria for committing to stable is pretty heavy testing of > the actual patch. For areas I don't maintain, I'm not really setup to > do the level of testing that would be required for stable. By the way, if you want a quick and easy way to do testing, my Firmware Linux project builds bootable system images for arm, mips, ppc, sh4, x86, and x86-64, targeted at qemu. You can download prebuilt binary tarballs if you don't want to run the build on your local machine, and it includes boot scripts for qemu in the system image tarballs. I'm in the process of putting together the 0.9.6 release, there's an -rc up at http://impactlinux.com/fwl/downloads/snapshots/2009-03-30/ You can download the appropriate system image tarball from there (or the older 0.9.5 release versions from http://impactlinux.com/fwl/downloads/binaries/system-image/ ) extract it and "./run-emulator.sh". You should get kernel boot messages ending in a shell prompt inside the emulator. (It's got a complete native toolchain in there so you can even compile stuff, the virtual network's set up to masquerade out so you can wget stuff, etc.) In the case of the above two bugs, system-image.powerpc doesn't boot under qemu 0.10.1 without the openbios-ppc fix, and system-image-sh4 doesn't boot under qemu 0.10.1 without the sh4 fix. With said fixes, they both boot fine. There's a locally reproducible test with complete source code. (It even builds its own cross compilers.) FWL also builds a sparc image that doesn't work due to a uClibc bug, and an m68k image that doesn't boot because qemu doesn't actually support m68k, just coldfire. My goals for the 1.0 release are to build images for every target qemu supports. I was recently surprised to build a 440 image and find that qemu's bamboo board is kvm only. :P Anyway, more details on http://impactlinux.com/fwl I'm in the process of putting together the 0.9.6 release, there's an -rc up at http://impactlinux.com/fwl/downloads/snapshots/2009-03-30/ > I'd suggest that the original maintainers who commit the patches to > trunk should be the ones to determine whether a patch should also go in > stable. I'm all for it, but in the case of sh4 they already submitted the patch here (that's the post I'm linking to) and it never got merged even into 0.10.0 or 0.10.1. I see it's in now. (On the ppc front, I suspect Blue Swirl can take care of himself. :) Rob -- GPLv3 is to GPLv2 what Attack of the Clones is to The Empire Strikes Back.