Re: [gentoo-dev] Virtualization Herd

[Chris Gianelloni]

On Tue, 2006-07-04 at 07:59 -0600, Nick Devito wrote:
> Yeah, to me, having those in the emulation category just
> doesn't...."fit" there, but, that's just me. Maybe we could take xen,
> vmware, qemu, and related packages out of app-emulation, and make a new
> category, app-virtualization. That would seem to fit a bit better then
> emulation.

Package moves suck.  They make finding history on the packages much
harder, and there's really no need for it.  I'd be against it for
VMware.  We don't need anything that makes our lives more complex.
VMware's ability to have all of the modules break on every single kernel
release keeps us busy enough, as it is.

> On Tue, 2006-07-04 at 12:11 +0100, Chris Bainbridge wrote:
> > On 03/07/06, Benedikt Böhm <hollow@g.o> wrote:
> > > On Monday 03 July 2006 21:56, Nick Devito wrote:
> > > > Okay, in that case, extend the vserver herd to include a larger range of
> > > > virtualization stuff, including Xen, Bochs, and so on. It just seems
> > > > more fitting to group those packages together.
> > >
> > > not really, bochs, qemu and vmware is emulation, merely used in virtualization
> > > environments
> >
> > Qemu (with the kqemu module) and vmware both directly execute the
> > native bytecode. Bochs is the only real emulator.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering - Strategic Lead
x86 Architecture Team
Games - Developer
Gentoo Linux