When I read Avi's TODO, I basically thought about getting rid of the
long command lines I had to store in scripts. I wanted to write that
command line once, and then forgetting about it, until I needed to
change it.
Instead of inventing great and wonderfully complicated schemes, the
most
Jorge Lucángeli Obes schrieb:
qemu: could not open hard disk image '@config'
I think this was a suggestion for implementation, not a working feature.
I did not know about '@config', and if I can get it to work, I like it
better than a shell script. However, I think it does not completely
Thiemo Seufer wrote:
Jorge Lucángeli Obes wrote:
[snip]
When I read Avi's TODO, I basically thought about getting rid of the
long command lines I had to store in scripts. I wanted to write that
command line once, and then forgetting about it, until I needed to
change it.
Instead of
Am 13.08.2007 um 11:19 schrieb Laurent Vivier:
We can modify qemu to test if the argument is a directory, if yes,
it reads args
from file args in this directory and for security the disk image
must be in the
same directory.
for instance, we have:
./pc1/
./pc1/args
./pc1/my_disk
On 8/14/07, Laurent Vivier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Markus Hitter wrote:
Am 13.08.2007 um 11:19 schrieb Laurent Vivier:
We can modify qemu to test if the argument is a directory, if yes, it
reads args
from file args in this directory and for security the disk image must
be in the
Jorge Lucángeli Obes wrote:
[snip]
Quoting Thiemo, this '@' thing was a feature which is now implemented
in the GNU toolchain. That's why I tried it. Now I would like to know
what he did to get it working. It would certainly be an useful
feature, even if it does not exactly suit our purposes.
Jorge Lucángeli Obes wrote:
My feeling is that config files are outdated. When used with a gui,
you end up writing silly parsers and stuff and still wrecking things
horribly when the the gui writer's expectations don't match reality.
When used without a gui, they increase the amount of
Avi Kivity wrote:
Jorge Lucángeli Obes wrote:
My feeling is that config files are outdated. When used with a gui,
you end up writing silly parsers and stuff and still wrecking things
horribly when the the gui writer's expectations don't match reality.
When used without a gui, they increase
Jorge Lucángeli Obes wrote:
[snip]
When I read Avi's TODO, I basically thought about getting rid of the
long command lines I had to store in scripts. I wanted to write that
command line once, and then forgetting about it, until I needed to
change it.
Instead of inventing great and wonderfully
On Mon, 2007-08-13 at 20:39 +0100, Thiemo Seufer wrote:
Jorge Lucángeli Obes wrote:
[snip]
When I read Avi's TODO, I basically thought about getting rid of the
long command lines I had to store in scripts. I wanted to write that
command line once, and then forgetting about it, until I
Avi Kivity wrote:
This is a big effort but a config file is the right long term solution.
For which use case? management-full or management-less?
Both. A config file will be useful not just for expressing the
functionality we have today, but also for describing the guest's
Anthony Liguori wrote:
Jorge Lucángeli Obes wrote:
Hi all,
From what I've gathered, it seems that we have basically four options
at hand. I think it's important to notice, however, that whatever
comes out of this will probably be, as Avi said, a low-end solution.
IMHO there's room to have
Avi Kivity wrote:
Anthony Liguori wrote:
Avi Kivity wrote:
This is a big effort but a config file is the right long term
solution.
For which use case? management-full or management-less?
Both. A config file will be useful not just for expressing the
functionality we have
My feeling is that config files are outdated. When used with a gui,
you end up writing silly parsers and stuff and still wrecking things
horribly when the the gui writer's expectations don't match reality.
When used without a gui, they increase the amount of details one has
to remember
14 matches
Mail list logo
