From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LnjaT-0004dT-1M for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 28 Mar 2009 21:13:21 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LnjaO-0004bS-JM for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 28 Mar 2009 21:13:20 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=51692 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LnjaO-0004bP-Cb for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 28 Mar 2009 21:13:16 -0400 Received: from yx-out-1718.google.com ([74.125.44.156]:60520) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LnjaO-0002rO-5Y for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 28 Mar 2009 21:13:16 -0400 Received: by yx-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id 34so931911yxf.82 for ; Sat, 28 Mar 2009 18:13:15 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <49CECB28.30306@codemonkey.ws> Date: Sat, 28 Mar 2009 20:13:12 -0500 From: Anthony Liguori MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [6907] Introducing qcow2 extensions (Uri Lublin) References: <49CE7352.1050800@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <49CE7352.1050800@redhat.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: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Cc: uri Lublin Avi Kivity wrote: > > We should introduce a notion of compatible vs. incompatible extensions. > > A compatible extension my be ignored by the qcow2 code if it does not > understand the magic number. An incompatible extension causes an > abort. This allows both more flexibility in how we can change the > file format. I believe ext* does the same thing. I was assuming that all extensions would be compatible. I don't like the idea of having qcow2 files floating around that require specific version of QEMU. For that, we should just bump to qcow3 (that's what versioning is for, right? :-). Regards, Anthony Liguori