From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LvyRQ-0007yL-2V for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 20 Apr 2009 14:42:04 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LvyRL-0007v9-Ds for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 20 Apr 2009 14:42:03 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=45266 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LvyRL-0007v2-6t for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 20 Apr 2009 14:41:59 -0400 Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:32928) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LvyRK-0004fx-OW for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 20 Apr 2009 14:41:59 -0400 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (int-mx2.corp.redhat.com [172.16.27.26]) by mx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n3KIfvqA026368 for ; Mon, 20 Apr 2009 14:41:57 -0400 Message-ID: <49ECC1E9.8020708@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2009 21:41:45 +0300 From: Avi Kivity MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 1/2] Rework -boot option References: <49ECAB4A.2090106@siemens.com> <49ECB940.5060100@codemonkey.ws> <49ECC01E.80605@web.de> In-Reply-To: <49ECC01E.80605@web.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; 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 Jan Kiszka wrote: > Everything is possible, but comes with a price: > - more complex code > - more ugly and inconsistent user interface > > Is there no precedence for breaking the command line interface in order > to clean things up? > > An alternative could be to keep -boot as is, at least for the next few > major releases, and introduce a new option with the proposed format. Not > much simpler, but a bit. And comes with the chance to drop the legacy at > some point. Any naming suggestions welcome! > I suggest keeping /boot. And slightly change Anthony's proposal to: - if no '=' is found in the parameter, use the old syntax - otherwise, use the new syntax -- Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic.