On Mon, May 8, 2023 at 5:48 AM Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Mon, May 08, 2023 at 01:42:04PM +0300, Michael Tokarev wrote: > > 08.05.2023 13:28, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > On Sun, May 07, 2023 at 08:56:23PM +0300, Michael Tokarev wrote: > > .. > > > > > > I'm about to revert that old change on debian, to make it just a > warning instead > > > > of an error (the code is different now, but the same principle > applies), - because > > > > I dislike dependencies which are useless 99.9% of the time and are > trivial to > > > > install when actually needed. > > .. > > > I advise against it. > > > If you boot guest on a system with boot rom not installed you will not > > > be able to migrate to a system with boot rom installed. > > > why not? because we don't know how big to make the rom BAR. > > > And users will not discover until much much later after they have > > > painted themselves into a corner. > > > > Yes, I know about the migration. Actually there's an old bug report open > > against debian qemu package, - the context is similar to the old bios128 > > vs bios256 thing in qemu upstream, - boot roms might change in size too. > > > > In this context though, the talk is not about migration at all. The > missing > > dep is in Xen HVM qemu package, a xen-only build of qemu-system-i386. And > > this one fails to start unless the boot roms are provided. It is not even > > capable of migration to begin with :) > > > > Thank you for the reminder, - very useful. > > > > /mjt > > I guess we decided we'd rather not handle reports from users about net > boot not working. It's true most users don't need net boot but then > that's true for most qemu functionality - 99% of users > probably need 1% of the functionality. It's just a different 1% for each > user... > Yea, but to every user, their 1% is the most important thing ever... Or so it seems some days :) Warner
