From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1D1CXR-0005TV-Vn for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 15 Feb 2005 18:55:30 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1D1CUM-0004hJ-6z for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 15 Feb 2005 18:52:26 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1D1CUG-0004dG-7Y for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 15 Feb 2005 18:52:12 -0500 Received: from [32.97.110.130] (helo=e32.co.us.ibm.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (TLSv1:DES-CBC3-SHA:168) (Exim 4.34) id 1D1CCJ-0005f5-2n for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 15 Feb 2005 18:33:39 -0500 Received: from westrelay01.boulder.ibm.com (westrelay01.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.10]) by e32.co.us.ibm.com (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id j1FNXa5j666662 for ; Tue, 15 Feb 2005 18:33:36 -0500 Received: from d03av03.boulder.ibm.com (d03av03.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.169]) by westrelay01.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.10/NCO/VER6.6) with ESMTP id j1FNXaA8091178 for ; Tue, 15 Feb 2005 16:33:36 -0700 Received: from d03av03.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av03.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j1FNXZ6P013145 for ; Tue, 15 Feb 2005 16:33:36 -0700 Received: from austin.ibm.com (netmail1.austin.ibm.com [9.41.248.175]) by d03av03.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j1FNXZ1g013136 for ; Tue, 15 Feb 2005 16:33:35 -0700 Received: from popmail.austin.ibm.com (popmail.austin.ibm.com [9.41.248.166]) by austin.ibm.com (8.12.9/8.12.10) with ESMTP id j1FNXVE4039190 for ; Tue, 15 Feb 2005 17:33:31 -0600 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (IBM-SNBP24SAQU0-009041207103.austin.ibm.com [9.41.207.103]) by popmail.austin.ibm.com (AIX5.1/8.11.6p2/8.9.3) with ESMTP id j1FNXUX30322 for ; Tue, 15 Feb 2005 17:33:31 -0600 Message-ID: <421286A2.7020609@grandecom.net> Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 17:32:50 -0600 From: Gregory Alexander MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Old version support. Was: Re: [Qemu-devel] FreeOSZoo will stop March 1, 2005 References: <200502121018.09039.jm@poure.com> <420DD7F8.5080805@wasp.net.au> <8c93d882b06fc13db0eda968a8f261ec@axiros.com> <420E07E2.5090106@wasp.net.au> <345371aff0fb0626b3d6f11161d57ad0@axiros.com> <118123041.20050212191149@ena.si> <715d3905bcba4149077ab7c26f09737c@axiros.com> <67341562.20050213010610@ena.si> In-Reply-To: <67341562.20050213010610@ena.si> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1250; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Reply-To: gwa@alumni.cmu.edu, 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 I worry about the availability of patches for the old version, since the=20 new one is so much faster. (See bochs->Qemu mass move, when system=20 emulation became available.) Will Fabrice continue to support the userspace version of QEMU? KQEMU would be an EXCELLENT way to test the CPU emulation of userspace=20 QEMU. Is anyone considering doing this? Is it an option with the new=20 license? These are the kinds of problems that I foresee. Anyways, I understand the rationale, just have a few fears. Thanks, GREG Jernej Simon=E8i=E8 wrote: > On Saturday, February 12, 2005, 22:18:48, Daniel Egger wrote: >=20 >=20 >>If you only intend to run Linux VMs and don't have a problem >>patching the kernel sources this is a very viable approach to >>get something which is not possible anymore *without* kqemu >>which is more flexible but does only run on 32bit kernels ATM. >=20 >=20 > You don't understand - I was asking what are you loosing with "new" Qem= u > without the kernel module compared to Qemu before the kernel module was > introduced. I know that with the kernel module Qemu runs much faster, b= ut if > you don't want to use it due to it's licence, you haven't lost anything > compared to before the module was available. Or have you? >=20