Re: [libvirt] [Qemu-devel] Re: Supporting hypervisor specific APIs in libvirt
On 03/24/2010 06:42 PM, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 12:42:16 +0200
Avi Kivity<avi(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> So, at best qemud is a toy for people who are annoyed by libvirt.
>
Is the reason for doing this in qemu because libvirt is annoying?
Mostly.
I don't see
how adding yet another layer/daemon is going to improve ours and user's life
(the same applies for libqemu).
libvirt becomes optional.
If I got it right, there were two complaints from the kvm-devel
flamewar:
1. Qemu has usability problems
2. There's no way an external tool can get /proc/kallsyms info from Qemu
I don't see how libqemu can help with 1) and having qemud doesn't seem
the best solution for 2) either.
Still talking about 2), what's wrong in getting the PID or having a QMP
connection in a well known location as suggested by Anthony?
I now believe that's the best option.
--
Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic.