Re: Virtual FAT disk images

2021-08-31 Thread Pascal
up :-) nobody uses this feature of qemu? Le ven. 27 août 2021 à 11:11, Pascal a écrit : > hello everybody, > > virtual FAT disk image - *which is a convenient way to transfer files to > the guest without having to activate its network* - seems to work very > poorly with Windows : do you have the

Re: Virtual FAT disk images

2021-09-09 Thread Pascal
up² :-) can someone just ping me to make me sure I'm posting on the qemu list ? Le mar. 31 août 2021 à 09:24, Pascal a écrit : > up :-) > nobody uses this feature of qemu? > > Le ven. 27 août 2021 à 11:11, Pascal a écrit : > >> hello everybody, >> >> virtual FAT disk image - *which is a conveni

Re: Virtual FAT disk images

2021-09-09 Thread Eric Blake
On Thu, Sep 09, 2021 at 09:32:48AM +0200, Pascal wrote: > up² :-) > can someone just ping me to make me sure I'm posting on the qemu list ? Your question is reaching the list, but this mail ought to be informative: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2021-09/msg02463.html In short, the

Re: Virtual FAT disk images

2021-09-10 Thread Pascal
hi everybody, thank you for your pings (which reassured me) and your answers (especially Eric). I would like to be able to participate (patch) but I regret, I do not have the skills :-(. I will test the two advanced tracks (p9/mtp). I use qemu in "windows lab" mode and I regularly need to transfer

Re: Virtual FAT disk images

2021-09-10 Thread Peter Maydell
On Thu, 9 Sept 2021 at 20:24, Eric Blake wrote: > There may be other less-risky ways for easily transferring files > between host and guest; I know in the past I have seen both p9 and MTP > file systems mentioned as approaches, although I do not have > experience with setting those up myself to gi

Re: Virtual FAT disk images

2021-09-10 Thread Pascal
mea-culpa, I forgot to add this to my morning answer : *a big thank you to all those who contribute to this great open source tool that is Qemu !* Le ven. 10 sept. 2021 à 11:08, Peter Maydell a écrit : > On Thu, 9 Sept 2021 at 20:24, Eric Blake wrote: > > There may be other less-risky ways for