From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1MF8ib-00053Z-8f
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 12 Jun 2009 11:31:01 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1MF8iW-0004wB-Lt
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 12 Jun 2009 11:31:00 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=36390 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MF8iW-0004vl-D7
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 12 Jun 2009 11:30:56 -0400
Received: from mo-p00-ob.rzone.de ([81.169.146.162]:21447)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <mail@kevin-wolf.de>) id 1MF8iV-0001om-R9
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 12 Jun 2009 11:30:56 -0400
Message-ID: <4A32746E.8060904@kevin-wolf.de>
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 17:29:50 +0200
From: Kevin Wolf <mail@kevin-wolf.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/4] Machine config files
References: <20090610173803.4674.82538.stgit@wren.home>	<4A30FE41.1040907@redhat.com>	<200906111418.43669.paul@codesourcery.com>	<4A3208F7.4030806@kevin-wolf.de>	<87vdn11rzy.fsf@pike.pond.sub.org>	<4A326498.90801@kevin-wolf.de>
	<4A326DF1.3040406@codemonkey.ws>
In-Reply-To: <4A326DF1.3040406@codemonkey.ws>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
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: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
Cc: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

Anthony Liguori schrieb:
> Kevin Wolf wrote:
>> Markus Armbruster schrieb:
>>   
>> Don't get me wrong, I'm not against configuration files. Having them is
>> great and probably I'd even find some uses for them occasionally. I just
>> don't want to be _forced_ to use them which I fear is what Paul is
>> talking about.
>>   
> 
> What we need is a command line option that can be used to manipulate a 
> device tree.  All of the existing options could then be implemented in 
> terms of the former option.

I like this idea of a generic device tree manipulation option. Could
come in handy for small ad-hoc modifications to the default config.

> There will probably be a lot of things in the future that you can only 
> do via device tree manipulation.  I don't see any reason why not to add 
> convenient syntax though for the most common things.

Having to use the generic option or a config file for the more obscure
things is absolutely fine with me as long as I can still change the
memory size, network cards and so on using the existing (more or less
obvious) options.

Kevin