From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1O0Mai-0004U0-HP for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 09 Apr 2010 18:22:20 -0400 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=46275 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1O0Mah-0004Te-7s for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 09 Apr 2010 18:22:20 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1O0Maf-0005YY-Vd for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 09 Apr 2010 18:22:19 -0400 Received: from mail-yw0-f198.google.com ([209.85.211.198]:50391) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1O0Maf-0005YO-R3 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 09 Apr 2010 18:22:17 -0400 Received: by ywh36 with SMTP id 36so1727533ywh.4 for ; Fri, 09 Apr 2010 15:22:16 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <20100409212212.GB31666@shareable.org> Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 17:22:11 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [GSoC 2010] Pass-through filesystem support. From: Javier Guerra Giraldez Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Mohammed Gamal Cc: Anthony Liguori , Cam Macdonell , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, kvm-devel On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 5:17 PM, Mohammed Gamal wrote: > That's all good and well. The question now is which direction would > the community prefer to go. Would everyone be just happy with > virtio-9p passthrough? Would it support multiple OSs (Windows comes to > mind here)? Or would we eventually need to patch Samba for passthrough > filesystems? found this: http://code.google.com/p/ninefs/ it's a BSD-licensed 9p client for windows.... i have no idea of how stable / complete / trustable it is; but might be some start -- Javier