On 17 September 2014 12:25, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 17/09/2014 18:12, Peter Maydell ha scritto:
>> Does anybody care to try to float the idea of an API
>> extension to the binfmt stuff to pass us the argv0
>> out-of-band (eg via an elf auxv vector entry if some
>> new binfmt flag is passed)? Tha
Il 17/09/2014 18:12, Peter Maydell ha scritto:
> On 17 September 2014 08:34, Joakim Tjernlund
> wrote:
>> Did this go anywhere ? Is there a solution in sight?
>
> I was hoping for more distro input, but absent that:
>
> Does anybody care to try to float the idea of an API
> extension to the binf
On 17 September 2014 08:34, Joakim Tjernlund
wrote:
> Did this go anywhere ? Is there a solution in sight?
I was hoping for more distro input, but absent that:
Does anybody care to try to float the idea of an API
extension to the binfmt stuff to pass us the argv0
out-of-band (eg via an elf auxv
Riku Voipio wrote on 2014/09/01 11:51:15:
>
> On Mon, Sep 01, 2014 at 10:12:18AM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> > On 1 September 2014 09:51, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > > Il 29/08/2014 20:01, Peter Maydell ha scritto:
> > >> [cc'ing MJT for more distro opinion since I think fundamentally
> > >> the
On Mon, Sep 01, 2014 at 10:12:18AM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 1 September 2014 09:51, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > Il 29/08/2014 20:01, Peter Maydell ha scritto:
> >> [cc'ing MJT for more distro opinion since I think fundamentally
> >> the choice we ought to make upstream is "what's not going to
On 1 September 2014 10:28, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 01/09/2014 11:12, Peter Maydell ha scritto:
>>> We'd just add Ps and we'd be fine.
>>
>> But this would break all your existing users' existing
>> chroot setups. That's the question I'm after an answer to:
>> what do you (as a distro) think woul
Il 01/09/2014 11:12, Peter Maydell ha scritto:
>> We'd just add Ps and we'd be fine.
>
> But this would break all your existing users' existing
> chroot setups. That's the question I'm after an answer to:
> what do you (as a distro) think would be acceptable as
> transitional breakage, if anything
On 1 September 2014 09:51, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 29/08/2014 20:01, Peter Maydell ha scritto:
>> [cc'ing MJT for more distro opinion since I think fundamentally
>> the choice we ought to make upstream is "what's not going to
>> screw over distros"... Paolo, is there a RedHat QEMU maintainer
>>
Il 29/08/2014 20:01, Peter Maydell ha scritto:
> [cc'ing MJT for more distro opinion since I think fundamentally
> the choice we ought to make upstream is "what's not going to
> screw over distros"... Paolo, is there a RedHat QEMU maintainer
> who would have an opinion here?]
There's Cole Robinson
Peter Maydell wrote on 2014/08/29 20:01:12:
.
>
> What I really would like is a way for the kernel to tell the
> interpreter binary what particular mangling it's chosen to do
> of the command line arguments. Then we could have one
> binary that coped in both situations and when run via the
>
[cc'ing MJT for more distro opinion since I think fundamentally
the choice we ought to make upstream is "what's not going to
screw over distros"... Paolo, is there a RedHat QEMU maintainer
who would have an opinion here?]
On 25 August 2014 10:09, Riku Voipio wrote:
> After weekend, I think the so
Any resolution for how to handle P flag yet?
Jocke
Joakim Tjernlund/Transmode wrote on 2014/08/25 17:02:42:
>
> Riku Voipio wrote on 2014/08/25 16:49:17:
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 04:30:40PM +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > > Riku Voipio wrote on 2014/08/25 15:55:55:
> > > >
> > > >
Riku Voipio wrote on 2014/08/25 16:49:17:
>
> On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 04:30:40PM +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > Riku Voipio wrote on 2014/08/25 15:55:55:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 03:39:19PM +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > > > Then consider when you run a LXC w
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 04:30:40PM +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> Riku Voipio wrote on 2014/08/25 15:55:55:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 03:39:19PM +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > > Then consider when you run a LXC without P flag.
> >
> > Please remember that your usecase o
Riku Voipio wrote on 2014/08/25 15:55:55:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 03:39:19PM +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > Then consider when you run a LXC without P flag.
>
> Please remember that your usecase of running Qemu in LXC is a new
feature,
> never before supported. Adding new feat
Hi,
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 03:39:19PM +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> Then consider when you run a LXC without P flag.
Please remember that your usecase of running Qemu in LXC is a new feature,
never before supported. Adding new features is always nice. However, it must
not happen with expense
Riku Voipio wrote on 2014/08/25 14:42:57:
>
> On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 11:14:58AM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 25.08.14 11:09, Riku Voipio wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > After weekend, I think the solution to using the P flag is to
> > > go back to Joakim's original patch:
> > >
>
> Le 25 août 2014 à 14:46, Alexander Graf a écrit :
>
>
>
>
> On 25.08.14 14:42, Riku Voipio wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 11:14:58AM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 25.08.14 11:09, Riku Voipio wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> After weekend, I think the solution to using the P fla
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 02:46:21PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
>
>
> On 25.08.14 14:42, Riku Voipio wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 11:14:58AM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 25.08.14 11:09, Riku Voipio wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> After weekend, I think the solution to using t
On 25.08.14 14:42, Riku Voipio wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 11:14:58AM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 25.08.14 11:09, Riku Voipio wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> After weekend, I think the solution to using the P flag is to
>>> go back to Joakim's original patch:
>>>
>>> http://lists.gnu.org
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 11:14:58AM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
>
>
> On 25.08.14 11:09, Riku Voipio wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > After weekend, I think the solution to using the P flag is to
> > go back to Joakim's original patch:
> >
> > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2014-07/msg02269
Alexander Graf wrote on 2014/08/25 11:14:58:
>
> On 25.08.14 11:09, Riku Voipio wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > After weekend, I think the solution to using the P flag is to
> > go back to Joakim's original patch:
> >
> > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2014-07/msg02269.html
> >
> > With t
On 25.08.14 11:09, Riku Voipio wrote:
> Hi,
>
> After weekend, I think the solution to using the P flag is to
> go back to Joakim's original patch:
>
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2014-07/msg02269.html
>
> With this, we get:
>
> If you continue to use qemu-x-static in your bi
23 matches
Mail list logo
