On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 8:06 PM, Adrian Chadd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 16/03/2008, Robert Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Another avenue to consider is the Linux KVM virtualization technology, > which > > is seeing a high level of interest in the Linux community and sounds > > increasingly mature and well-exercised. It would also offer interesting > > migration benefits for Linux users wanting to try FreeBSD, allowing them > to > > trivially create new FreeBSD installs under their existing Linux install. > We > > had an SoC project last year but I'm not sure what the outcome was; it > would > > be useful to give Fabio a ping and see how things are going. Obviously, > > anyone doing this project would need to manage the license issues involved > > carefully. > > Wasn't part of the original KVM idea to support a "hypervisor" > interface to a parent, sort of Xen-like, providing interrupt, VM and > inter-VM "IPC" hooks? > > I remember seeing this stuff a while back but for some reason all I > read about KVM - outside of what Redhat are doing with it and Xen now > - focuses on hardware virtualisation. > > A BSD-licenced KVM hypervisor + FreeBSD kernel might be an interesting > project. I'm pretty sure Rusty wrote a very very lightweight KVM > hypervisor as a demonstration which may serve as a starting point for > things.
Nope. It is called lguest, is GPL, IBM has the rights to it and has no interest in changing the license. Using KVM for architectural ideas while starting from a fresh codebase is really the only way to go if you are concerned with licensing. -Kip _______________________________________________ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
