From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=58457 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PhPqM-0001oF-CE
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 24 Jan 2011 12:04:44 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <Jes.Sorensen@redhat.com>) id 1PhPpu-00046H-O9
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 24 Jan 2011 12:04:16 -0500
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:1026)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <Jes.Sorensen@redhat.com>) id 1PhPpu-000468-FU
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 24 Jan 2011 12:04:14 -0500
Message-ID: <4D3DB106.5010607@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2011 18:04:06 +0100
From: Jes Sorensen <Jes.Sorensen@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1295270117-24760-1-git-send-email-mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
	<1295270117-24760-8-git-send-email-mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
	<4D39B668.4040806@redhat.com> <4D39C8A6.7000404@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
	<4D3D5185.40900@redhat.com> <4D3DAE10.1090000@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
In-Reply-To: <4D3DAE10.1090000@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: [RFC][PATCH v6 07/23] virtagent: base server
	definitions
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.nongnu.org/archive/html/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: Michael Roth <mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: agl@linux.vnet.ibm.com, stefanha@linux.vnet.ibm.com, abeekhof@redhat.com, marcel.mittelstaedt@de.ibm.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, aliguori@linux.vnet.ibm.com, ryanh@us.ibm.com, markus_mueller@de.ibm.com

On 01/24/11 17:51, Michael Roth wrote:
> On 01/24/2011 04:16 AM, Jes Sorensen wrote:
>> It's obviously contentious, and it is not core functionality. In order
>> to get the patches adapted upstream it would easy the process to remove
>> it and keep it as a separate patch.
> 
> Fair enough, the proposed copyfile replacement would be suitable as well.
> 
> My main concern is stripping away too much functionality for the initial
> merge, since guest-initiated shutdown is all we'd really have left
> lacking viewdmesg/viewfile.
> 
> Would it be better to get copyfile in for the initial set of patches, or
> as a subsequent set?

Having copyfile would be good in an initial release too - however we
should probably review it in the light of Dan's suggestion of using
libguestfs.

I am working on freeze/thaw support which I hope to have ready within a
couple of days. It would be nice to get in, in an early release as well.

Cheers,
Jes