On 25 July 2011 13:18, Jan Kiszka <jan.kis...@siemens.com> wrote: > On 2011-07-25 14:05, Peter Maydell wrote: >> In fact having thought about it a bit I'm going to go further >> and say that the whole idea of a "default machine" is a rather >> x86-centric idea -- most architectures don't really have a >> single machine type that's used by just about everybody, >> always has been, and isn't likely to become obsolete in the >> future. So if we're reworking the command line API to >> supersede "-M" then we shouldn't have a default at all. > > Then you may want to drop is_default = 1 from integratorcp and prepare > the main loop to face a NULL machine.
We can't change the default machine for -M, that would break backwards compatibility. All we can do is avoid having a notion of "default machine" in new command line syntax. -- PMM
