From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1KY4LK-0001cD-6n
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 26 Aug 2008 15:36:42 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1KY4LI-0001bm-Jw
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 26 Aug 2008 15:36:41 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=54985 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KY4LI-0001be-HN
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 26 Aug 2008 15:36:40 -0400
Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:50305)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <kraxel@redhat.com>) id 1KY4LH-0000xG-NA
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 26 Aug 2008 15:36:40 -0400
Message-ID: <48B45ADC.7070706@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2008 21:34:52 +0200
From: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/2] xenner: add event channel implementation.
References: <1219400728-20422-1-git-send-email-kraxel@redhat.com>	<m2n.s.1KWU8S-002Pyj@chiark.greenend.org.uk>	<18611.58069.185496.122923@mariner.uk.xensource.com>	<48B40184.5040908@redhat.com>
	<18612.1289.91003.979159@mariner.uk.xensource.com>
In-Reply-To: <18612.1289.91003.979159@mariner.uk.xensource.com>
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: <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: Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com>
Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

Ian Jackson wrote:
> Gerd Hoffmann writes ("Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/2] xenner: add event channel implementation."):
>> Ian Jackson wrote:
>>> Why not make it a compile-time option ?
>> IMHO compile time options are a usability nightmare in most cases.
> 
> They're not a problem if you need different versions in the two cases
> anyway.  That is going to be the case for the foreseeable future.

I'd like to see the very same binary being used some day.  I know the
day is most likely a few years away, and it wouldn't work with todays
Xen versions because XenD will need changes too to make that happen (see
monitor vs xenstore discussion for example).  But IMHO that is no reason
to give up on that right from the start.

cheers,
  Gerd