Re: [Qemu-devel] ANNOUNCE: Release 0.10.1 of QEMU

[Aurelien Jarno]

On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 07:25:03PM -0500, Rob Landley wrote:
> On Tuesday 24 March 2009 16:20:14 Anthony Liguori wrote:
> > Rob Landley wrote:
> > > On Saturday 21 March 2009 18:25:23 Anthony Liguori wrote:
> > >> The QEMU team is pleased to announce the availability of the 0.10.1
> > >> release.  This is a stable release of the 0.10 tree and contains only
> > >> bug fixes since the 0.10.0.  The attached Changelog includes all of the
> > >> changes that have went in since 0.10.0.
> > >>
> > >> It can be downloaded from Savannah at:
> > >>
> > >>  http://savannah.nongnu.org/download/qemu/qemu-0.10.1.tar.gz
> > >
> > > This doesn't include a fix powerpc -nographic (either by reverting to the
> > > previous openbios-ppc or by upgrading to current OpenBios svn):
> > >   http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2009-03/msg01070.html
> > >
> > > Nor does it include the fix for sh4 -append:
> > >   http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2009-02/msg00727.html
> >
> > Part of my criteria for committing to stable is pretty heavy testing of
> > the actual patch.  For areas I don't maintain, I'm not really setup to
> > do the level of testing that would be required for stable.
> 
> By the way, if you want a quick and easy way to do testing, my Firmware Linux 
> project builds bootable system images for arm, mips, ppc, sh4, x86, and 
> x86-64, targeted at qemu.  You can download prebuilt binary tarballs if you 
> don't want to run the build on your local machine, and it includes boot 
> scripts for qemu in the system image tarballs.
> 
> I'm in the process of putting together the 0.9.6 release, there's an -rc up 
> at 
> http://impactlinux.com/fwl/downloads/snapshots/2009-03-30/
> 
> You can download the appropriate system image tarball from there (or the 
> older 
> 0.9.5 release versions from 
> http://impactlinux.com/fwl/downloads/binaries/system-image/ ) extract it 
> and "./run-emulator.sh".  You should get kernel boot messages ending in a 
> shell prompt inside the emulator.  (It's got a complete native toolchain in 
> there so you can even compile stuff, the virtual network's set up to 
> masquerade out so you can wget stuff, etc.)
> 
> In the case of the above two bugs, system-image.powerpc doesn't boot under 
> qemu 0.10.1 without the openbios-ppc fix, and system-image-sh4 doesn't boot 
> under qemu 0.10.1 without the sh4 fix.  With said fixes, they both boot fine. 
>  
> There's a locally reproducible test with complete source code.  (It even 
> builds its own cross compilers.)
> 
> FWL also builds a sparc image that doesn't work due to a uClibc bug, and an 
> m68k image that doesn't boot because qemu doesn't actually support m68k, just 
> coldfire.  My goals for the 1.0 release are to build images for every target 
> qemu supports.  I was recently surprised to build a 440 image and find that 
> qemu's bamboo board is kvm only. :P
> 
> Anyway, more details on http://impactlinux.com/fwl
> 
> I'm in the process of putting together the 0.9.6 release, there's an -rc up 
> at 
> http://impactlinux.com/fwl/downloads/snapshots/2009-03-30/
> 
> > I'd suggest that the original maintainers who commit the patches to
> > trunk should be the ones to determine whether a patch should also go in
> > stable.
> 
> I'm all for it, but in the case of sh4 they already submitted the patch here 
> (that's the post I'm linking to) and it never got merged even into 0.10.0 or 
> 0.10.1.  I see it's in now.
> 

The patch that you are linking is clearly not a candidate to stable, as
bugs have been found (like wrong kernel load address) during the
discussions that were still ongoing at the time of your requests, and it
was not even in trunk at this moment.

The patch that has been committed to trunk recently is different from
this one. Moreover I fail to see how it can be considered a regression
and not a new feature as it has never worked before. Note that 
qemu-system-sh4 works fine without this patch as long as you don't need
to pass a kernel argument.

Given that you keep insisting, I have committed a backported patch from
trunk. It is really new in trunk and so has not been really tested and
it may be reverted if we find any regression with it.

-- 
Aurelien Jarno                          GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73
address@hidden                 http://www.aurel32.net