|
From: | Avi Kivity |
Subject: | Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [libvirt] Supporting hypervisor specific APIs in libvirt |
Date: | Wed, 24 Mar 2010 21:49:45 +0200 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100301 Fedora/3.0.3-1.fc12 Thunderbird/3.0.3 |
On 03/24/2010 06:42 PM, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 12:42:16 +0200 Avi Kivity<address@hidden> 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?
Mostly.
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.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |