From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1CxnMQ-0004Gx-Js
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 06 Feb 2005 09:26:03 -0500
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1CxnMI-00047X-Te
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 06 Feb 2005 09:25:55 -0500
Received: from [129.104.30.34] (helo=mx1.polytechnique.org)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1Cxmhi-0006hu-QR
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 06 Feb 2005 08:43:59 -0500
Received: from [84.99.204.131] (131.204.99-84.rev.gaoland.net [84.99.204.131])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by ssl.polytechnique.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A850A331F0
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Sun,  6 Feb 2005 14:43:56 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <42061F58.3080001@bellard.org>
Date: Sun, 06 Feb 2005 14:44:56 +0100
From: Fabrice Bellard <fabrice@bellard.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Port E9 hack
References: <420613B7.2070202@enix.org>
In-Reply-To: <420613B7.2070202@enix.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.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: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

> I had no feedback regarding my port E9 hack patch. Does that mean that
> this functionnality is not desirable for Qemu ? Should I give up with 
> this ?

Don't worry, it will be merged someday. Just a question : why did you 
code it as if there were several port E9 devices ?

Fabrice.