From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: Add wrapper script around QEMU to test kernels
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 14:42:57 +0200
Message-ID: <CAOJsxLGuRtWHbOugqHoxCNDmCrtiLFh7xMo8BVGNprG3GoanOQ__35495.8863616504$1320669813$gmane$org@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAOJsxLE2_ce+SCT25cmS7iFuH3SyJeYRNHjxG5iBPkodTX1AoA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4EB67D17.7000701@redhat.com>
	<CAOJsxLGRDeMg1CWJ+A6zYCb7dZnm1cm7UL0UVipmJJk4GFGtWA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4EB680D9.2070706@redhat.com>
	<CAOJsxLFpNG1iZt8=XU2xH3x9dFCqjM=+i8y4EMPg0Ah47bYfqg@mail.gmail.com>
	<877C82F4-F07C-44AA-8722-3AF57CFC4597@suse.de>
	<CAOJsxLFhB8V94VWbDgM6d_rgcy8XQNEfYBKYG1eh6oUMiQicEA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4EB7B1A9.9000409@redhat.com>
	<alpine.LFD.2.02.1111071333350.2815@tux.localdomain>
	<4EB7CA52.5050409@redhat.com>
	<20111107122902.GA24685@thunk.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE
To: "Ted Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>, Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi>,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>,
	Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>, Avi Kivity <av
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-vx0-f174.google.com ([209.85.220.174]:38856 "EHLO
	mail-vx0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S932317Ab1KGMm6 convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT
	<rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>); Mon, 7 Nov 2011 07:42:58 -0500
In-Reply-To: <20111107122902.GA24685@thunk.org>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

Hi Ted,

On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 2:29 PM, Ted Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> wrote:
> And the same problems will exist with kvm-tool. =A0What if you need t=
o
> release a new version of kvm-tool? =A0Does that mean that you have to
> release a new set of kernel binaries? =A0It's a mess, and there's a
> reason why we don't have glibc, e2fsprogs, xfsprogs, util-linux-ng,
> etc., all packaged into the kernel sources.

If we need to release a new version, patches would go through the
-stable tree just like with any other subsystem.

On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 2:29 PM, Ted Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> wrote:
> Because it's a stupid, idiotic thing to do.

The discussion is turning into whether or not linux/tools makes sense
or not. I wish you guys would have had it before perf was merged to
the tree.

                        Pekka