Hi, berta...@ptitcanardnoir.org wrote (27 Jun 2012 11:00:22 GMT) : > On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 04:32:31AM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
>> Yes, but I think it would make more sense to emulate a USB storage >> device in qemu rather than the host kernel. I do agree. bertagaz and I have spent a bit more time testing and comparing the available options. Our results are summed up there: https://tails.boum.org/todo/automated_builds_and_tests/USB/ tl;dr --> as far as Wheezy is concerned: * qemu-kvm emulates just fine a USB 2.0 mass storage device, and knows how to boot from it; personally, I'd rather use that than a dedicated kernel module. * with qemu-kvm on the command-line: no need for an additional kernel module * with a libvirt stack: a missing interface in some abstraction layer makes it a pain to use the qemu-kvm USB emulation of removable mass storage devices. We are going to request the missing interface to upstream libvirt, but it's unlikely the result thereof is ready in time for Wheezy. So, with my Tails developer hat, we would be happy to use g_mass_storage at least from now to the Wheezy+1 release. > I don't know; would be interested to hear other people's opinions > on this. I'd be interested too! Cc'ing the Debian Live mailing-list, as there may be folks there who have experience on this topic. Perhaps debian-boot and/or debian-installer should be added to the mix as well, what do you think? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/851ukzxloc....@boum.org
