From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LV7pV-0000im-JV for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 05 Feb 2009 12:15:57 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LV7pU-0000iY-KH for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 05 Feb 2009 12:15:56 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=57752 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LV7pU-0000iU-E0 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 05 Feb 2009 12:15:56 -0500 Received: from mr01.hansenet.de ([213.191.74.10]:60345) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LV7pU-0003Vf-2p for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 05 Feb 2009 12:15:56 -0500 Received: from exactcode.de (85.183.32.143) by mr01.hansenet.de (7.3.132) id 4967D255002E9AB4 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 5 Feb 2009 18:15:55 +0100 Received: from [192.168.2.173] (helo=[192.168.2.173]) by exactcode.de with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.54) id 1LV7pN-0005w6-6z for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 05 Feb 2009 17:15:53 +0000 Message-ID: <498B1EC6.8000504@exactcode.de> Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2009 18:15:50 +0100 From: =?UTF-8?B?UmVuw6kgUmViZQ==?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: Cutting a new QEMU release References: <1233825194.6637.4.camel@ecrins.fosdick.home.net> <498AF6FC.90803@codemonkey.ws> <200902050936.49909.rickv@hobi.com> <200902051627.21972.paul@codesourcery.com> In-Reply-To: <200902051627.21972.paul@codesourcery.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: Quoted-Printable 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 Paul Brook wrote: > On Thursday 05 February 2009, Rick Vernam wrote: > =20 >> On Thursday 05 February 2009 8:26:04 am Anthony Liguori wrote: >> =20 >>> kqemu is unsupported and unmaintained. >>> =20 >> Interesting. When did it fall into that status? >> =20 > > IMHO It's pretty much always been that way. > > =20 >> The Maintainers file shows Fabrice as the maintainer of kqemu. I supp= ose >> that needs to be updated? >> >> I see Fabrice released 1.4.0pre1 on May 30th, 2008, although I never d= id >> see anything declaring it unsupported (I'm not suggesting it was never >> declared, just that I never saw any such declaration). >> >> Are there any plans to support it in the future? This really is quite= a >> shock to me, actually. I know qemu has a wide range of uses - but for= me >> and surely others, virtualization is a primary use. To the best of my >> knowledge, kvm requires hardware support - where does this leave the c= lass >> of users who need virtualization & don't have hardware virtualization >> support? Are we no longer the a target audience of qemu? If not, fin= e, >> but apparently a statement needs to be made... >> =20 > > You have the source, you're free to fork and maintain it yourself. > > In practice Fabice is pretty much the only person who's ever done signi= ficant=20 > work on kqemu (except maybe some fairly minor host OS porting bits). Th= ere's=20 > never been a public source repository, so you get to use whatever rando= m=20 > tarballs Fabrice leaves lying around. If those don't work, noone really= =20 > cares. > =20 I find this rather drastic. So far it appears to work pretty well. And gi= ven the sheer amount of CPU sililcon without VT/SVM it looks to be worth keeping working. Maybe just to pull it into the Qemu SVN? Btw. anyone knows what Fabice is doing these days? --=20 Ren=C3=A9 Rebe - ExactCODE GmbH - Europe, Germany, Berlin http://exactcode.de | http://t2-project.org | http://rene.rebe.name