From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1ExrBB-0007ss-RG for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 14 Jan 2006 14:35:13 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1ExrBA-0007sB-Mb for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 14 Jan 2006 14:35:12 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ExrBA-0007s2-CZ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 14 Jan 2006 14:35:12 -0500 Received: from [66.249.82.204] (helo=xproxy.gmail.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1ExrEN-0003cI-3J for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 14 Jan 2006 14:38:31 -0500 Received: by xproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id s6so622344wxc for ; Sat, 14 Jan 2006 11:32:54 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 20:32:54 +0100 From: andrzej zaborowski Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Qemu - where will it go? In-Reply-To: <200601141132.03700.info@j-pfennig.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline References: <200601141132.03700.info@j-pfennig.de> Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Hi, > - define a protocol to use qemu over a network (should multiplex > video, sound, usb, serial and so on). > > So you see: in a commercial and or industrial application one would like= to run > the qemus on a server. At least the MS remote desktop protocol should wor= k > well. A qemu specific client would be nicer. > > Please do not try to make the current qemu program a better GUI applicati= on - > do it the other way: move SDL out of qemu and write an extra client app! > I'm not a QEMU developer but I don't think QEMU is seeking commercial and or industrial popularity (I might be wrong though). Personally I'd rather be trying to keep it small and do its own task well rather than reimplement in QEMU parts of other programs' tasks. The universal rules of writing cross-platform software clearly show that dependencies on other packages (libraries, utilities) are a good thing. It's also one of the UNIX traditions to have big tasks divided into small parts and each of them be carried out by a different tool. So I think the existing protocols should be used for remote control, SDL supports several different frontends for audio and video and many of them already offer full network transparency (X, esound), and for USB, other, platform-specific mechanisms can be used for remote devices (like the Linux network block/character devices support). I agree with your other points. Regards, Andrew -- balrog 2oo6 Dear Outlook users: Please remove me from your address books http://www.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=3D03/08/21/143258