From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=50887 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OCY4v-00063G-2u for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 13 May 2010 09:03:54 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OCY4t-0001Fl-9c for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 13 May 2010 09:03:52 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:15474) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OCY4t-0001Fc-25 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 13 May 2010 09:03:51 -0400 Message-ID: <4BEBF8D1.7060401@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 13 May 2010 09:04:17 -0400 From: Cole Robinson MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1273696161-14332-1-git-send-email-crobinso@redhat.com> <4BEB11DD.20601@redhat.com> <4BEB142F.2000002@redhat.com> <4BEBB9C2.3050302@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <4BEBB9C2.3050302@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH] Revive -version 'QEMU PC Emulator...' List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Jes Sorensen Cc: aliguori@us.ibm.com, clalance@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org On 05/13/2010 04:35 AM, Jes Sorensen wrote: > On 05/12/10 22:48, Cole Robinson wrote: >> I agree libvirt's method is a crappy approach. Adding a proper -version >> argument is certainly the way forward, but doesn't help users with >> existing libvirt installations that want to use latest qemu. This is the >> type of issue that libvirt devs will be fielding for months. Ideally i'd >> like the order to be: >> >> 1) Apply this patch >> 2) Add a proper -version argument, maybe named -version_num >> 3) libvirt patched to use new version argument (and robustify legacy >> version parsing) >> 4) Some reasonable amount of time from now (6 months, a year?), edit the >> current -version string at will >> >> I'd be willing to do 2 and 3 if people agree. > > Hi Cole, > > I think rather than 1, it would be better to add a patch to libvirt to > catch both formats. I know Chris Lalancette already cooked up a patch > for this. Combined with the 2) patch I just posted, and 3) I think that > should take care of the problems. > It doesn't solve the problem for existing libvirt installations. It's not uncommon for users to track just the latest kvm releases without upgrading libvirt: any future qemu or kvm release will break every version of libvirt that exists today. Given that unfortunate case, I still recommend reverting the 'PC' change at least for long enough for a few fixed libvirt releases to make it into the wild. - Cole