On 16/12/2015 08:20, Thomas Huth wrote: > Ah, ok, that makes more sense... anyway, "-device ?" also lists some > devices like "ne2k_isa", ""usb-bt-dongle" and "vmxnet3" ... I somewhat > doubt that we want to have these in the list of "-net nic" supported > devices, too.
Why not? > ... hmmm, by the way, why the heck do we have vmxnet3 on powerpc? Does > that make sense at all? By default all PCI devices are included in all targets, that's the simple explanation. :) >>>>>> The thing is, people are still running QEMU from the command line. >>>>>> >>>>>> "-net nic -net bridge,br=virbr0" is still much less of a mouthful than >>>>>> "-netdev bridge,br=virbr0,id=br -device rtl8139,netdev=br" if all I want >>>>>> is something I can ssh into. >>>>>> >>>>>> It's easy to deprecate things. It's hard to convince users that it's >>>>>> worth, and you haven't convinced this user. :) > > Just another idea before we drop this topic again completely: What if > we'd extend "-netdev" to be easier to use, too. For example, if you'd > just specify "-netdev bridge,br=virbr0", without using an id and without > specifying a "-device", you would get the netdev hooked up to the > board's default NIC automatically. That would be even less to type than > your example with "-net" since you would not need the "-net nic" > parameter in that case... Would it then be ok to deprecate the "-net" > option? Actually that would be the worst of both worlds. :) The point of -netdev is exactly to have no magic, to be a direct connection between the command line and the devices. It makes sense, it's just not too user friendly. I really think that if you move -net to net/netlegacy.c it wouldn't look bad at all. Paolo