qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v5 10/11] qemu-ga: Install Windows VSS provider


From: Tomoki Sekiyama
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v5 10/11] qemu-ga: Install Windows VSS provider on `qemu-ga -s install'
Date: Fri, 5 Jul 2013 17:06:37 +0000

On 7/4/13 8:54 , "Paolo Bonzini" <address@hidden> wrote:

>Il 03/07/2013 18:19, Tomoki Sekiyama ha scritto:
>> On 7/3/13 11:58 , "Paolo Bonzini" <address@hidden> wrote:
>> 
>>> Il 03/07/2013 17:49, Tomoki Sekiyama ha scritto:
>>>> -                return ga_install_service(path, log_filepath,
>>>> fixed_state_dir);
>>>> +                if (ga_install_vss_provider()) {
>>>> +                    return EXIT_FAILURE;
>>>> +                }
>>>> +                if (ga_install_service(path, log_filepath,
>>>> fixed_state_dir)) {
>>>> +                    ga_uninstall_vss_provider();
>>>> +                    return EXIT_FAILURE;
>>>> +                }
>>>> +                return 0;
>>>>              } else if (strcmp(service, "uninstall") == 0) {
>>>> +                ga_uninstall_vss_provider();
>>>>                  return ga_uninstall_service();
>>>
>>> I think this shouldn't be a hard failure.  Only the freeze/thaw
>>>commands
>>> should fail.
>>>
>>> Paolo
>> 
>> Do you mean that qemu-ga should work without qga-provider.dll etc.
>> even if it is configured --with-vss-sdk ?
>
>Yes, and I'm even wondering if we should move all VSS code to a DLL
>(provider and requestor---they are very tied to each other anyway
>because of hEventFrozen/hEventThaw), and have qemu-ga simply look for
>qga-provider.dll dropped into the executable directory.
>
>Then qemu-ga can look for it even if it is not configured --with-vss-sdk.

Hm, that sounds reasonable.

I will try on moving the requestor into qga-provider.dll at next
iteration. 

>This is because the license of the SDK may be problematic for
>distributions that compile qemu-ga from source.  These distribution
>cannot distribute the SDK, and thus they will not be able to compile and
>distribute the provider DLL.  Still, we should make it as easy as
>possible to combine a DLL and executable from separate sources
>into---for example---a single MSI.
> 
>Paolo

Thanks,

Tomoki Sekiyama




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]