From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NuWzT-0002yM-FI for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 24 Mar 2010 16:15:47 -0400 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=44557 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NuWzO-0002ah-UN for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 24 Mar 2010 16:15:47 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NuWwQ-0004q7-KO for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 24 Mar 2010 16:12:40 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:47854) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NuWwQ-0004pv-A0 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 24 Mar 2010 16:12:38 -0400 Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 17:12:19 -0300 From: Luiz Capitulino Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [libvirt] Supporting hypervisor specific APIs in libvirt Message-ID: <20100324171219.4365318b@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <4BAA6CD9.6060001@redhat.com> References: <4BA7C40C.2040505@codemonkey.ws> <20100323145105.GV16253@redhat.com> <4BA8D8A9.7090308@codemonkey.ws> <201003231557.19474.paul@codesourcery.com> <4BA8E6FC.9080207@codemonkey.ws> <4BA901B5.3020704@redhat.com> <4BA9A066.3070904@redhat.com> <20100324103643.GB624@redhat.com> <4BA9EC88.6000906@redhat.com> <20100324134250.38822113@redhat.com> <4BAA6CD9.6060001@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Avi Kivity Cc: "libvir-list@redhat.com" , Paul Brook , qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 21:49:45 +0200 Avi Kivity wrote: > On 03/24/2010 06:42 PM, Luiz Capitulino wrote: > > On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 12:42:16 +0200 > > Avi Kivity wrote: > > > > > >> So, at best qemud is a toy for people who are annoyed by libvirt. > >> > > Is the reason for doing this in qemu because libvirt is annoying? > > Mostly. > > > I don't see > > how adding yet another layer/daemon is going to improve ours and user's life > > (the same applies for libqemu). > > > > libvirt becomes optional. I think it should only be optional if all you want is to run a single VM in this case what seems to be missing on our side is a _real_ GUI, bundled with QEMU potentially written in a high-level language. Then we make virt-manager optional and this is good because we can sync features way faster and we don't have to care about _managing_ several VMs, our world in terms of usability and maintainability is about one VM. IMVHO, everything else should be done by third-party tools like libvirt, we just provide the means for it.