On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 05:08:00PM +0200, Jiri Denemark wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 15:55:09 +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > My feeling is that we came to agreement with the QEMU developers that we
> > would exclusively useful QMP probing with any QEMU from 1.2.0 or later
> > and would no
On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 15:55:09 +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> My feeling is that we came to agreement with the QEMU developers that we
> would exclusively useful QMP probing with any QEMU from 1.2.0 or later
> and would not try to follow changes they make to the non-QMP interfaces
> we previo
On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 04:48:00PM +0200, Jiri Denemark wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 15:35:38 +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 04:30:03PM +0200, Jiri Denemark wrote:
> > > QEMU changed the output of -cpu ? and CPU models can now be followed by
> > > its description.
On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 15:35:38 +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 04:30:03PM +0200, Jiri Denemark wrote:
> > QEMU changed the output of -cpu ? and CPU models can now be followed by
> > its description. Our parser just used both model name and its
> > description as a model
On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 04:30:03PM +0200, Jiri Denemark wrote:
> QEMU changed the output of -cpu ? and CPU models can now be followed by
> its description. Our parser just used both model name and its
> description as a model name, which made any model with a description
> unusable with libvirt.
W
QEMU changed the output of -cpu ? and CPU models can now be followed by
its description. Our parser just used both model name and its
description as a model name, which made any model with a description
unusable with libvirt.
---
src/qemu/qemu_capabilities.c | 11 ---
1 file changed, 8 ins
