From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1MMGea-0006Mp-Ku
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 02 Jul 2009 03:24:20 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1MMGeW-0006IJ-4B
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 02 Jul 2009 03:24:20 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=47565 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MMGeV-0006I9-W5
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 02 Jul 2009 03:24:16 -0400
Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:47757)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <kwolf@redhat.com>) id 1MMGeV-0001yD-IL
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 02 Jul 2009 03:24:15 -0400
Message-ID: <4A4C6053.9000200@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2009 09:22:59 +0200
From: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Warn if a qcow (not qcow2) file is opened
References: <1246284289-25394-1-git-send-email-avi@redhat.com>
	<4A49CE00.4090504@redhat.com> <4A4A13F7.8050904@codemonkey.ws>
	<5130D93B-F80E-4B4B-8140-F77C7178EC99@web.de>
In-Reply-To: <5130D93B-F80E-4B4B-8140-F77C7178EC99@web.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
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: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Andreas_F=E4rber?= <andreas.faerber@web.de>
Cc: QEMU Developers <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org

Andreas F=E4rber schrieb:
> I'm confused now. Only recently someone stepped up, saying that qcow2 =20
> was broken and that qcow should be used instead for safety reasons. =20
> Now all of a sudden, it's the exact opposite, you're even considering =20
> replacing qcow with qcow2 for vvfat and dropping qcow support.

Basically, qcow1 is unmaintained. On the one hand this means that its
code is rarely changed and is quite stable in that respect, on the other
hand it means that nobody cares if it's broken e.g. by changes to the
block layer in general. There is no breakage I know of in the current
stable release, however git master has been broken for a month now.

And I'm pretty sure that qcow2 receives more testing than qcow.

Kevin