From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1MA73h-0005i5-Q9
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 29 May 2009 14:44:01 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1MA73d-0005hW-5Y
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 29 May 2009 14:44:01 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=60176 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MA73d-0005hT-2w
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 29 May 2009 14:43:57 -0400
Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:49135)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <glommer@redhat.com>) id 1MA73c-0008FX-Ix
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 29 May 2009 14:43:56 -0400
Date: Fri, 29 May 2009 15:49:15 -0300
From: Glauber Costa <glommer@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH] remove pieces of source code
Message-ID: <20090529184915.GB8897@poweredge.glommer>
References: <1243551838-1980-1-git-send-email-glommer@redhat.com>
	<4A1F77C0.9050407@codemonkey.ws>
	<20090529113230.GG30777@poweredge.glommer>
	<gvovqf$ifq$1@ger.gmane.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <gvovqf$ifq$1@ger.gmane.org>
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Consul <void@aleksoft.net>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 08:43:09AM -0700, Consul wrote:
> Glauber Costa wrote:
>> But traffic in the mailing list indicates that it is less and less the case.
>> And more importantly: As it bitrots, nobody fixes it. so...
>>
>>>  o There is no alternative for non-Linux users and folks with non-VT/SVM
>>> hardware
>>
>> Sure, but I don't think kqemu is such an alternative. ;-)
>
> It is. Without kqemu I'll have no alternative, but switch to VBox or VMWare.
> And none of them work with qcow images.
I'm not saying that because of any kind of functionality. I'm saying it is
not an alternative, because nobody really maintains it. It's bitrotting,
and unless someone wants to step up, soon or later you won't be able to use it
anyway.