From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Dex2g-0001T3-KQ
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 05 Jun 2005 11:28:02 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Dex2d-0001Np-0i
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 05 Jun 2005 11:27:59 -0400
Received: from [129.104.30.34] (helo=mx1.polytechnique.org)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1Dewyf-0004VT-OT
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 05 Jun 2005 11:23:53 -0400
Received: from [84.99.204.52] (52.204.99-84.rev.gaoland.net [84.99.204.52])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by ssl.polytechnique.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A34733168
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Sun,  5 Jun 2005 17:20:49 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <42A31853.8060903@bellard.org>
Date: Sun, 05 Jun 2005 17:20:51 +0200
From: Fabrice Bellard <fabrice@bellard.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] qemu/hw pc.c
References: <E1DewT1-0003YU-00@savannah.gnu.org>
	<41e41e7a050605080238e8bae6@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <41e41e7a050605080238e8bae6@mail.gmail.com>
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

Hetz Ben Hamo wrote:
> Hi Fabrice,
> 
> 
>>Log message:
>>       PC machine support
> 
> 
> Care to explain what this means? :)

I'll update the documentation. The idea is that you can select the 
machine you want to emulate with the -M option. For x86 it is not an 
issue because there is a single machine now. But maybe "-isa" could be 
suppressed and a new machine called "isapc" could be added.

Fabrice.