From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IM1Cl-0005bR-LT for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 08:45:31 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IM1Ci-0005aV-WA for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 08:45:29 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IM1Ci-0005aS-O8 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 08:45:28 -0400 Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com ([64.233.182.190]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1IM1Ci-0005qj-BH for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 08:45:28 -0400 Received: by nf-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id 30so296107nfu for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 05:45:27 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <46C5984B.3060708@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 14:44:59 +0200 From: dragoran MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] merging kqemu into mainline kernel? References: <8a6cde920708040926s6e12edd0mc3b469ab741c5653@mail.gmail.com> <23bcb8700708160542m45c3d561q3c1590fcfeea3a09@mail.gmail.com> <46C448DA.70303@gmail.com> <46C46693.1020307@freeshell.org> In-Reply-To: <46C46693.1020307@freeshell.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed 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: "Bill C. Riemers" Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Bill C. Riemers wrote: > dragoran wrote: > >> Bill C. Riemers wrote: >> >>> You don't need to compile kqemu into the kernel. When I install >>> dkms-kqemu from freshrpms, I do NOT rebuild my kernel. I am fairly >>> certain with Fedora's new policy for extras, there would not be much >>> of a problem getting it added to Fedora. For that matter, it could >>> probably get added into the new Enterprise Extra's repository as >>> well. However, someone would need to volunteer to maintain the package. >>> >> no thats not true fedora want to change the policy about out of tree >> modules the want to drop all kmod-* packages and only allow modules >> into the kernel rpm that are upstream or about to get merged upstream. >> anyway why has kqemu to be a out of tree module? >> > It looks like you are right. Apparently the plan is to move the > acceptance of kernel modules to kernel maintainers. For the most part, > they only want to accept very cleanly written modules that are likely to > be integrated into the kernel. Since "kqemu" is viewed as a solution > only for obsolete hardware, that is not likely to happen. I am not sure that working on older hardware will keep it out of the kernel. it adds support for unsupported hardware .... I don't see a problem here. > It is a shame > too, because "kqemu" provides a quality working solution for most of the > hardware still in use today. > > we should atleast try to get it in ... the "it wont get merged anyway" attitude isn't very helpfull.