On Mon, Oct 03, 2005 at 03:01:08PM +0200, Henrik Nordstrom wrote: > On Sun, 2 Oct 2005, Jean-Christian de Rivaz wrote: > >>In fact, if qemu supported both these things, then I don't see a reason > >>for > >>-tun-fd at all (except for something like VDE). > > > >Agree, and a -vde option will go forward in this direction. > > vde is not the only userspace switch available. Locking qemu to only vde > would be bad. I then much prefer not having the builtin vde option or even > the tun/tap open code and only keep -tun-fd. (from -tun-fd all the others > can be implemented by a wrapper opening the connections and handing them > over to QEMU) >
Agreed. So "-net socket,fd=..." or at least -socket-fd (I think it should be made clear that qemu won't require tap fds, just datagram sockets.) > >To be clear, I don't propose to remove option at this point, but just to > >make qemu more easy to use for simple and most common setup. > > See the proposal from Fabrice some month ago on what the command line > parameters should look like. Very nice imho. And very easy to extend with > new modes (VDE, persistent TUN/TAP, whatever) without having to introduce > new confusing options. > Agreed. > Regards > Henrik > > > _______________________________________________ > Qemu-devel mailing list > Qemu-devel@nongnu.org > http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel > -- Infinite complexity begets infinite beauty. Infinite precision begets infinite perfection. _______________________________________________ Qemu-devel mailing list Qemu-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel
