From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=45668 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PhV0z-00009X-0S for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 24 Jan 2011 17:36:03 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PhUsE-0004j6-7G for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 24 Jan 2011 17:26:59 -0500 Received: from e1.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.141]:50659) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PhUsE-0004ir-4q for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 24 Jan 2011 17:26:58 -0500 Received: from d01dlp01.pok.ibm.com (d01dlp01.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.56]) by e1.ny.us.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1) with ESMTP id p0OMGpWr022673 for ; Mon, 24 Jan 2011 17:17:50 -0500 Received: from d01relay02.pok.ibm.com (d01relay02.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.234]) by d01dlp01.pok.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 136847280B1 for ; Mon, 24 Jan 2011 17:26:28 -0500 (EST) Received: from d03av03.boulder.ibm.com (d03av03.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.169]) by d01relay02.pok.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id p0OMQR4c278744 for ; Mon, 24 Jan 2011 17:26:27 -0500 Received: from d03av03.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av03.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id p0OMQRK1029287 for ; Mon, 24 Jan 2011 15:26:27 -0700 Message-ID: <4D3DFC81.4010807@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2011 16:26:09 -0600 From: Anthony Liguori MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [RFC][PATCH v6 08/23] virtagent: add va.getfile RPC References: <1295270117-24760-1-git-send-email-mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1295270117-24760-9-git-send-email-mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <4D39B716.1010400@redhat.com> <20110121172026.GK12589@redhat.com> <4D39CF2C.1000407@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20110124220809.GA4254@amd.home.annexia.org> <20110124222019.GA4602@amd.home.annexia.org> In-Reply-To: <20110124222019.GA4602@amd.home.annexia.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: "Richard W.M. Jones" Cc: agl@linux.vnet.ibm.com, stefanha@linux.vnet.ibm.com, Jes Sorensen , marcel.mittelstaedt@de.ibm.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Michael Roth , ryanh@us.ibm.com, markus_mueller@de.ibm.com, abeekhof@redhat.com On 01/24/2011 04:20 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 10:08:09PM +0000, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > >> You might as well reuse the libguestfs API here because you get the >> benefit of all the code that's been written, all the tools on top, and >> a far more comprehensive API that would take you another 2 years to >> implement. >> > To put it in some perspective, libguestfs is just shy of 500K lines of > code now, not including the tools built on top. 150 page manual just > for the core API. > Yeah, but I think that's the reason that it might not be a good candidate for this use-case. We need a *simple* interface that we can convince everyone to install by default and run in their guests. It needs to be flexible enough that we can do lots of fun things but simple enough that a reasonable person can audit the code in a short period of time. It will never replace something as sophisticated as guestfs but that's not it's point. It's point is to let you do simple things like execute a command in the guest or peek at /proc/meminfo. You don't need 500k LOCs for that. Regards, Anthony Liguori > Rich. > >