On 8/6/07, Anthony Liguori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I don't think adding annotations as snapshots is the right approach. I
> think proper support should be added in the header. I wouldn't be too
> concerned with breaking compatibility in qcow2. That's why it's qcow2
> and not just an updated
On 7/30/07, Avi Kivity <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jorge Lucángeli Obes wrote:
> > Hi Avi, hi all,
>
> I believe that Laurent (copied) is also interested in this area.
Copied him.
> > I've started some (very minor) groundwork for this task. My idea was
> > to add an extra "annotation" field in q
Jorge Lucángeli Obes wrote:
[...]
> Laurent, do you want the patches for the functionality that's working
> right now? We can divide the (not very big amount of) work that's
> left. It consists basically on teaching qemu how to look for command
> line options, if none are present on the current inv
Jorge Lucángeli Obes wrote:
Hi Avi, hi all,
I believe that Laurent (copied) is also interested in this area.
I've started some (very minor) groundwork for this task. My idea was
to add an extra "annotation" field in qcow2 snapshots. In this way, a
snapshot can hold abitrary information; f
