Hi,
On 15-06-17 12:29, Michael Thayer wrote:
Hello Hans,
Continuing this in a new thread without all the other recipients.
14.06.2017 17:03, Hans de Goede wrote:
Hi,
On 14-06-17 15:40, Michael Thayer wrote:
Hello Hans,
14.06.2017 15:30, Hans de Goede wrote:
[Discussion of vboxvideo and vboxguest driver clean-up.]
As I already mentioned in previous mails on this, for the vboxguest
driver
my plan is to simply do a fork and remove anything related to the
portability. It currently weighs in at 100000+ lines of code which is
a bit
much for what it does I believe I will be able to get a Linux only
version
of it down to a small fraction of that and the result will be a much
cleaner
and better driver.
FWIW I've already stared looking into cleaning up the vboxguest
driver and
my first target is to remove all dependencies on the r0drv code.
I have been thinking about this again. As I said before, this is your
decision to make, but I wonder whether getting vboxguest into the
upstream kernel is the most sensible approach to take, and for that
matter the best use of your time. I do realise that Red Hat have a
policy of trying to keep their kernels (the Fedora ones at least) as
close to upstream as possible, but I presume that exceptions are
possible. It seems to me that you are likely to expend quite a bit of
effort integrating our changes into an in-kernel version of vboxguest
with the result that most distributions will still end up with an
outdated version which needs replacing by our one.
I understand your concerns, I've been discussing this with my manager
and the plan is for me to start working on this, so that I can get a
feeling how much work this will actually be and then we will see from
there.
Regards,
Hans
_______________________________________________
vbox-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.virtualbox.org/mailman/listinfo/vbox-dev
