I see that kvm has been updated since Sept. 08 2007, and qemu hasn't since Sept. 12 2007. I understand that redhat is migrating from xen to kvm, I'm curious if that has provoked this reduced maintenance or if interest was just lost. If this is of interest to others, Qemu 0.9.1 does provide a lot more features lacking in 0.9.0 that I would like to use, including virtio and e1000 NIC models, which provide better performance, as well as netbooting virtuals. I'm curious to hear everyones thoughts on this. Best Regards, Michael Schenck -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-virt/attachments/20081119/b309eea2/attachment-0004.html>
On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 10:50 AM, Michael Schenck <limeschenck at gmail.com> wrote:> I see that kvm has been updated since Sept. 08 2007, and qemu hasn't since > Sept. 12 2007. > > I understand that redhat is migrating from xen to kvm, I'm curious if that > has provoked this reduced maintenance or if interest was just lost. > > If this is of interest to others, Qemu 0.9.1 does provide a lot more > features lacking in 0.9.0 that I would like to use, including virtio and > e1000 NIC models, which provide better performance, as well as netbooting > virtuals. > > I'm curious to hear everyones thoughts on this.Daniel de Kok has been busy with real life but I'm sure he is still interested in pushing kvm forward. He has provided qemu 0.9.1 here: http://people.centos.org/daniel/packages/qemu/ Akemi
Michael Schenck wrote:> I see that kvm has been updated since Sept. 08 2007, and qemu hasn't > since Sept. 12 2007. > > I understand that redhat is migrating from xen to kvm, I'm curious if > that has provoked this reduced maintenance or if interest was just lost. > > If this is of interest to others, Qemu 0.9.1 does provide a lot more > features lacking in 0.9.0 that I would like to use, including virtio and > e1000 NIC models, which provide better performance, as well as > netbooting virtuals. > > I'm curious to hear everyones thoughts on this.as i wrote earlier i've got many packages backported from fedora: http://www.lfarkas.org/linux/packages/centos/5/SRPMS/ but none of them really working (there are many kvm bugs on rhel/centos-5 which is not fixed:-() -- Levente "Si vis pacem para bellum!"