From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1L4z15-0004al-7b
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 09:35:51 -0500
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1L4z13-0004Xi-HB
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 09:35:50 -0500
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=46988 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1L4z13-0004XI-4P
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 09:35:49 -0500
Received: from an-out-0708.google.com ([209.85.132.251]:45755)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1L4z12-0008Ge-Pr
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 09:35:48 -0500
Received: by an-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id c38so983018ana.37
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 06:35:48 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <492C0D41.9040209@codemonkey.ws>
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 08:35:45 -0600
From: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 4 of 5] [UPDATE] DisplayState interface change
References: <4926EB0B.6040007@eu.citrix.com>	<492864CB.3060905@codemonkey.ws>	<492ADB80.9070309@eu.citrix.com>	<492B0781.6050505@codemonkey.ws>
	<492BEE32.6020209@eu.citrix.com>
In-Reply-To: <492BEE32.6020209@eu.citrix.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; 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

Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> Anthony Liguori wrote:
>
>   
>> If this seems like a major refactoring, let me know and either you're
>> misunderstanding what I'm suggesting or I've miscalculated how much
>> change is required here :-)
>>     
>
> That's fine, it is a simple change, it was me that didn't understand
> correctly what you were suggesting.
> Since at the moment we don't have a DisplayState multiplexing function,
> this means that we are going to keep the text_console_init as it is now
> so that we can still the serial and the monitor interfaces, right?
>   

Yup.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

>
>