On 10.05.2017 17:50, Thomas Huth wrote:
> We likely do not want to carry these legacy -drive options along forever.
> Let's emit a deprecation warning for the -drive options that have a
> replacement with the -device option, so that the (hopefully few) remaining
> users are aware of this and can
On 11.05.2017 08:45, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> Thomas Huth writes:
>
>> On 10.05.2017 17:55, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 10/05/2017 17:50, Thomas Huth wrote:
We likely do not want to carry these legacy -drive options along forever.
Let's emit a deprecation
Thomas Huth writes:
> On 10.05.2017 17:55, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 10/05/2017 17:50, Thomas Huth wrote:
>>> We likely do not want to carry these legacy -drive options along forever.
>>> Let's emit a deprecation warning for the -drive options that have a
>>>
On 10.05.2017 17:55, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>
> On 10/05/2017 17:50, Thomas Huth wrote:
>> We likely do not want to carry these legacy -drive options along forever.
>> Let's emit a deprecation warning for the -drive options that have a
>> replacement with the -device option, so that the
On 10/05/2017 17:50, Thomas Huth wrote:
> We likely do not want to carry these legacy -drive options along forever.
> Let's emit a deprecation warning for the -drive options that have a
> replacement with the -device option, so that the (hopefully few) remaining
> users are aware of this and can