someone interested in packaging VirtualBox?

[Daniel P. Berrange]

On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 04:45:07PM +0100, Gianluca Sforna wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 4:20 PM, Daniel P. Berrange <berrange at redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> > > what do you exactly mean with "too ugly to live"? Is it that fragile bad
> >  > code or does it just not fit the kernel styling guidelines?
> >
> >  In terms of accessing hardware virt capabilities, there is already a generic
> >  kernel module to expose hardware virtualization driver to userspace apps - it
> >  is called KVM.  If virtualbox needs access to hardware virt them it should
> >  use this existing driver.
> >
> >
> >  > And if the quality is just not good enough to get into fedora, what
> >  > efforts would be needed to fix that?
> >
> >  It should use the KVM module driver, and if the current functionality in
> >  KVM is not sufficient then VirtualBox should work with upstream to address
> >  the limitations. Having multiple kernel modules for virtualization does
> >  not help anyone.
> 
> Are Xen guys aware of this?

Xen doesn't use use kernel modules to access hardware virtualization. The
hypervisor itself is the first thing to boot & owns all hardware directly
and thus doesn't have to ask the kernel to get access to hardware virt
capabilities. So this question is irrelevant.

Dan.
-- 
|=- Red Hat, Engineering, Emerging Technologies, Boston.  +1 978 392 2496 -=|
|=-           Perl modules: http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/              -=|
|=-               Projects: http://freshmeat.net/~danielpb/               -=|
|=-  GnuPG: 7D3B9505   F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505  -=|