[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.02.1111071333350.2815@tux.localdomain>
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 13:34:51 +0200 (EET)
From: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
To: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@...hat.com>
cc: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>, Alexander Graf <agraf@...e.de>,
Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org list" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
qemu-devel Developers <qemu-devel@...gnu.org>,
Américo Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
Blue Swirl <blauwirbel@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: Add wrapper script around QEMU to test kernels
On Mon, 7 Nov 2011, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
>> It's not just about code, it's as much about culture and development process.
>
> Indeed. The BSDs have both kernel and the base system in a single
> repository. There are probably good reasons for (and against) it.
>
> In Linux we don't have that culture. No tool (except perf) lives in the
> kernel repo. I fail to see why kvm-tool is that much different from
> udev, util-linux, iproute, filesystem tools, that it should be included.
You seem to think perf is an exception - I think it's going to be the
future norm for userspace components that are very close to the kernel.
That's in fact what Ingo was arguing for when he suggested QEMU to be
merged to the kernel tree.
Pekka
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists