* [Qemu-devel] kqemu poll results
@ 2009-06-17 18:59 Anthony Liguori
2009-06-17 19:23 ` Christian Laursen
2009-06-18 11:20 ` Amit Shah
0 siblings, 2 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Anthony Liguori @ 2009-06-17 18:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
http://www.micropoll.com/akira/mpresult/604126-172373
Surprisingly, BSD host seems to be a dominating factor.
Regards,
Anthony Liguori
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [Qemu-devel] kqemu poll results
2009-06-17 18:59 [Qemu-devel] kqemu poll results Anthony Liguori
@ 2009-06-17 19:23 ` Christian Laursen
2009-06-17 21:02 ` Filip Navara
2009-06-18 11:20 ` Amit Shah
1 sibling, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Christian Laursen @ 2009-06-17 19:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Anthony Liguori wrote:
> http://www.micropoll.com/akira/mpresult/604126-172373
>
> Surprisingly, BSD host seems to be a dominating factor.
Until a few days ago, qemu+kqemu was the only practical way to run a
virtual machine on FreeBSD. Virtualbox has just been committed to ports
and a number of users will probably switch to using that now.
Personally I would prefer qemu+kvm if there was a FreeBSD port of kvm. I
probably lack both the time and skills to help with that. :(
--
Christian Laursen
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [Qemu-devel] kqemu poll results
2009-06-17 19:23 ` Christian Laursen
@ 2009-06-17 21:02 ` Filip Navara
2009-06-18 17:42 ` Christian Laursen
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Filip Navara @ 2009-06-17 21:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christian Laursen; +Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 626 bytes --]
On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 9:23 PM, Christian Laursen <xi@borderworlds.dk>wrote:
> Anthony Liguori wrote:
>
>> http://www.micropoll.com/akira/mpresult/604126-172373
>>
>> Surprisingly, BSD host seems to be a dominating factor.
>>
>
> Until a few days ago, qemu+kqemu was the only practical way to run a
> virtual machine on FreeBSD. Virtualbox has just been committed to ports and
> a number of users will probably switch to using that now.
>
> Personally I would prefer qemu+kvm if there was a FreeBSD port of kvm. I
> probably lack both the time and skills to help with that. :(
>
http://feanor.sssup.it/~fabio/freebsd/lkvm/
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1154 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [Qemu-devel] kqemu poll results
2009-06-17 21:02 ` Filip Navara
@ 2009-06-18 17:42 ` Christian Laursen
2009-06-21 9:00 ` Avi Kivity
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Christian Laursen @ 2009-06-18 17:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Filip Navara; +Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Filip Navara wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 9:23 PM, Christian Laursen <xi@borderworlds.dk
> <mailto:xi@borderworlds.dk>> wrote:
>
> Anthony Liguori wrote:
>
> http://www.micropoll.com/akira/mpresult/604126-172373
>
> Surprisingly, BSD host seems to be a dominating factor.
>
>
> Until a few days ago, qemu+kqemu was the only practical way to run a
> virtual machine on FreeBSD. Virtualbox has just been committed to
> ports and a number of users will probably switch to using that now.
>
> Personally I would prefer qemu+kvm if there was a FreeBSD port of
> kvm. I probably lack both the time and skills to help with that. :(
>
>
> http://feanor.sssup.it/~fabio/freebsd/lkvm/
As far as I can tell this is pretty far from being usable. It was not
complete at the end of SoC and was not imported to either the src tree
or as a port and has thus not been maintained since then.
Does anyone know if it has bitrotted too much to serve as a starting
point for a working port?
--
Christian Laursen
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [Qemu-devel] kqemu poll results
2009-06-18 17:42 ` Christian Laursen
@ 2009-06-21 9:00 ` Avi Kivity
0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Avi Kivity @ 2009-06-21 9:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christian Laursen; +Cc: Filip Navara, qemu-devel@nongnu.org
On 06/18/2009 08:42 PM, Christian Laursen wrote:
> As far as I can tell this is pretty far from being usable. It was not
> complete at the end of SoC and was not imported to either the src tree
> or as a port and has thus not been maintained since then.
>
> Does anyone know if it has bitrotted too much to serve as a starting
> point for a working port?
>
kvm-17 is ridiculously outdated. You could probably salvage some stuff
out of it, but not much.
Also missing is preempt-notifier emulation or support.
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [Qemu-devel] kqemu poll results
2009-06-17 18:59 [Qemu-devel] kqemu poll results Anthony Liguori
2009-06-17 19:23 ` Christian Laursen
@ 2009-06-18 11:20 ` Amit Shah
2009-06-18 12:07 ` Stefano Stabellini
1 sibling, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Amit Shah @ 2009-06-18 11:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Anthony Liguori; +Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
On (Wed) Jun 17 2009 [13:59:17], Anthony Liguori wrote:
> http://www.micropoll.com/akira/mpresult/604126-172373
Need flash to see the results?
Amit
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2009-06-21 8:59 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2009-06-17 18:59 [Qemu-devel] kqemu poll results Anthony Liguori
2009-06-17 19:23 ` Christian Laursen
2009-06-17 21:02 ` Filip Navara
2009-06-18 17:42 ` Christian Laursen
2009-06-21 9:00 ` Avi Kivity
2009-06-18 11:20 ` Amit Shah
2009-06-18 12:07 ` Stefano Stabellini
2009-06-18 18:36 ` [Qemu-devel] " Jan Kiszka
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).