From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IHe8n-0007ia-NF for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 05 Aug 2007 07:19:21 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IHe8h-0007hq-NG for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 05 Aug 2007 07:19:20 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IHe8h-0007hn-HT for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 05 Aug 2007 07:19:15 -0400 Received: from merlin.artenumerica.net ([80.68.90.14]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1IHe8a-0004tH-ST for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 05 Aug 2007 07:19:09 -0400 Received: from [10.10.1.21] (unknown [89.181.232.169]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by merlin.artenumerica.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D43E1501EA for ; Sun, 5 Aug 2007 12:18:43 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: <46B5B20C.9040107@artenumerica.com> Date: Sun, 05 Aug 2007 12:18:36 +0100 From: J M Cerqueira Esteves MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] RFE- snapshot data storage location configurable References: <46AFE651.8080306@filteredperception.org> In-Reply-To: <46AFE651.8080306@filteredperception.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Reply-To: 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 dmc wrote: > I have a pretty ugly patch against qemu 0.8 which allows the location of > data used with the -snapshot feature to be somewhere other than > /var/tmp. I have a use-case where I am creating many gigabytes of > changes to disk in snapshot mode. When 0.9 came out, I looked, but it > seemed less than trivial to update my patch, which was a pretty ugly > hack to begin with. > > I don't suppose anybody else thinks this would be a useful feature? It would certainly be useful, as I found out yesterday :) while testing installation of a big software package in a Windows virtual machine in snapshot mode (with 0.9.0) even though the (Linux) host's /tmp had about 1 GB. I would suggest at least honoring the TMPDIR environment variable (which is not being taken into account). Best regards J Esteves