From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:46454) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YJ79G-0003dW-Nh for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2015 16:06:11 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YJ79C-00048c-PZ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2015 16:06:10 -0500 Received: from mail-we0-x22d.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c03::22d]:34874) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YJ79C-00048U-Ii for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2015 16:06:06 -0500 Received: by mail-we0-f173.google.com with SMTP id w62so4145771wes.4 for ; Wed, 04 Feb 2015 13:06:06 -0800 (PST) Sender: Paolo Bonzini Message-ID: <54D289B9.5050808@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2015 22:06:01 +0100 From: Paolo Bonzini MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20150204113229.GN3032@redhat.com> <54D213E0.8090408@redhat.com> <20150204130041.GQ3032@redhat.com> <87egq5kcqh.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org> <87mw4thc0v.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] RFC: Universal encryption on QEMU I/O channels List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Peter Maydell , Markus Armbruster Cc: QEMU Developers On 04/02/2015 21:41, Peter Maydell wrote: > That suggests to me that we could reasonably advance to > 2.22 or 2.24 if it seemed beneficial, but not beyond that. > Is there anything particularly worthwhile that would get us? 2.22 is the first version to have GIO. 2.28 would give us TLS support in GIO, but Daniel said it's buggy. 2.32 has new-style synchronization primitives, for which we currently have some hideous compatibility wrappers. It looks like there's no particular reason yet to bump our requirement. Paolo