[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [libvirt] [Qemu-devel] Re: Supporting hypervisor specific APIs in libvirt

On 03/24/2010 06:42 PM, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 12:42:16 +0200
Avi Kivity<avi redhat com>  wrote:

So, at best qemud is a toy for people who are annoyed by libvirt.
  Is the reason for doing this in qemu because libvirt is annoying?


I don't see
how adding yet another layer/daemon is going to improve ours and user's life
(the same applies for libqemu).

libvirt becomes optional.

  If I got it right, there were two complaints from the kvm-devel flamewar:

1. Qemu has usability problems
2. There's no way an external tool can get /proc/kallsyms info from Qemu

  I don't see how libqemu can help with 1) and having qemud doesn't seem
the best solution for 2) either.

  Still talking about 2), what's wrong in getting the PID or having a QMP
connection in a well known location as suggested by Anthony?

I now believe that's the best option.

Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic.

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]