This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Home Products Support Community News


Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Update new qemu-dm to spawn vncviewer

To: "Jeremy Katz" <katzj@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Update new qemu-dm to spawn vncviewer
From: "Christian Limpach" <christian.limpach@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2006 20:06:49 -0400
Cc: xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Donald D. Dugger" <donald.d.dugger@xxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Sun, 23 Jul 2006 17:07:15 -0700
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=mRBHS0AAHmIr0V7xBLqTW5O2WdOJXUUKrtYTTlCFj3nFp6Zida/HBiCysFP5yY+xKFq+IlujFb3powik5tFI2rXOPScdNNEwumLSF2E849d4Q5iwnBGaOD9t7bh3hlk8/mUGcglpc7Qh6Cnpe4itTjpVDBR4En5FW2fXPjyQ21Q=
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <1153428341.4415.12.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <20060713040439.GA4099@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1153428341.4415.12.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: Christian.Limpach@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On 7/20/06, Jeremy Katz <katzj@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Wed, 2006-07-12 at 21:04 -0700, Donald D. Dugger wrote:
> 1)  Add `vncviewer' as an option to `qemu-dm' to spawn a `vncviewer' process.

Doesn't it make sense to push these sorts of changes to Fabrice and not
include them as a Xen patch until they're included in upstream qemu?
Otherwise, how do we avoid ending up back in the same place where we
have a huge pile of Xen specific patches making it very difficult to
rebase to a new version of qemu?

I don't think that we will end up in the same place because we keep
each feature as a separate patch.  It would certainly be good to push
changes which are generic enough to Fabrice, but I don't think we want
to wait with including the changes until they get included in an
upstream qemu version, especially since we will still be quite slow in
upgrading qemu.

Do you want to push suitable changes to Fabrice?  Anybody?


Xen-devel mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>