From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1MCUxk-0007i9-FP
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 05 Jun 2009 04:39:44 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1MCUxi-0007fg-G5
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 05 Jun 2009 04:39:43 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=46802 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MCUxi-0007fI-9p
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 05 Jun 2009 04:39:42 -0400
Received: from mx03.syneticon.net ([78.111.66.105]:43638)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <mangoo@wpkg.org>) id 1MCUxh-0008E1-VR
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 05 Jun 2009 04:39:42 -0400
Message-ID: <4A28D9E0.6030404@wpkg.org>
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2009 10:40:00 +0200
From: Tomasz Chmielewski <mangoo@wpkg.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] POLL: Why do you use kqemu?
References: <4A26F1E3.1040509@codemonkey.ws>
	<4A27FC69.9070501@mayc.ru>	<alpine.DEB.1.00.0906050243140.26154@pacific.mpi-cbg.de>
	<4A28CD17.4050107@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <4A28CD17.4050107@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
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: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>
Cc: "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, Anton D Kachalov <mouse@mayc.ru>

Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> On 06/05/09 02:44, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Thu, 4 Jun 2009, Anton D Kachalov wrote:
>>
>>> There is one point missed: "I do not use kqemu". Just to have statistics
>>> weight for the other side.
>>
>> I think that is totally beside the point.  The question is if it is worth
>> to continue to support kqemu.  And frankly, for that I could not care 
>> less
>> if there are people _not_ using kqemu if there are enough that _do_ use
>> kqemu to merit a continuation.
> 
> A poll for both users and non-users would make sense IMHO.  It should 
> include reasons for both groups though, i.e. like this:
> 
> I use kqemu because:
>   [ ] old hardware
>   [ ] *BSD host
>   ....
> 
> I don't use kqemu because:
>   [ ] using kvm instead
>   [ ] using virtualbox instead
>   [ ] doesn't work stable for me
>   ...

And what should I answer if I both use kqemu on some (old) hardware, and 
kvm otherwise?


-- 
Tomasz Chmielewski
http://wpkg.org