Talk:QEMU
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Windows support
The article says "incomplete support for Windows" but I've found no problem at all installing and running multiple versions, including Window XP Professional using the latest QEMU on x86. Same with all the conventional apps. Of course, accelerator makes the performance tolerable. --Phil Smith
- This problem I know existed in 0.6.1. CVS had the fix for a while, and now the 0.7.x series is perefectly able to boot XP. --Reub2000 21:43, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
- I believe what the article means by "incomplete support for Windows" is as a host OS, not as a guest OS. I believe the free virtualization module does have a windows version as well, so I don't know if it holds true at the moment. Anyways, the non-fullsystem emulation (for running binaries) is Linux only as far as I know. Rvalles 08:11, September 1, 2005 (UTC)
- I know it used to have incomplete Windows support – I think that's why it's there, the article was originally written when QEMU was still in its early stages – but since I haven't used Windows in well over two years now, I honestly wouldn't know... if it's running better, go ahead and change it (if you or someone else hasn't already). —
Martin Ultima (multima) • talk contribs leave message 16:19, 6 August 2006 (UTC)- I use it with no problems on Windows since I started using QEMU at the beginning of the 2006. I do believe the mentioned sentence is unnecessary. --Arny 04:44, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] How?
According to the blog of a kernel hacker, [1], QEMU does some pretty interesting stuff to manage what it does. But I'm afraid her summary made little sense to me, and I could not get the paper she referenced. A 'how' section is a necessity, I think. --Maru 05:38, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Hardware drivers?
It is noted as a disadvantage that it doesn't have special drivers for the guest system, but isn't it close enough that it emulates existing hardware, so its drivers can be used in the similar fashion? I've added that info, but I believe all that could be completely removed from Disadvantages because of that. However, as I am not sure about that, I won't touch it, and some more opinions would be welcome here. --Arny 14:44, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
- Having special drivers for the guest system could provide better I/O performance. For example, drivers included in the guest system would probably have small delays between byte writes in order to accomodate speed requirements of real hardware. But the delays are not really neessary for hardware that is emulated, and just are wasting time. There are other types of inefficiencies that come from needing to emulate real hardware (the guest OS drivers encode and pack data into bit structures, then QEMU's hardware emulation layer needs to unpack and decode the data again to interpret it). -- Bovineone 05:23, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Boot from USB?
"*It isn't possible to boot from the USB subsystem from within QEMU (it only can boot from floppy, hard disk, CD-ROM or an image of any of these (eg: an ISO Image of Windows XP Installation CD)), although a USB driver is available with the "-usb" switch, and will soon be loaded by default."
I saw that listed under the disadvantages of qemu and am wondering how this is relevant to qemu. The bios qemu uses (either bochs bios or bbios) would be responsible for this.
[edit] Knoppix 4
Can somebody post "the string" to run Knoppix 4 in Qemu in Windows XP? renegadeviking
- It would probably be something along the lines of
qemu -cdrom knoppix.iso -boot d -m 128– try runningqemuwithout any options for the complete list. The examples provided here are intended mainly as very general examples, and they intentionally don't list any specific operating system distribution – don't want WP:SPAM, do we? (Note – those examples were posted based on how it works on my own Linux system, so I'm not sure if you'd need any extra options for Windows...) — Martin Ultima (multima) • talk contribs leave message 16:25, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Merge Qemu-Launcher ?
Looks like an old tag; it would be nice to see it go. Anyone care whether Qemu-Launcher gets merged into this article? I lean towards a yes, but I'm not a quorum; if I can see three or four more votes that aren't a no, I'll do the merge. ◉ ghoti 03:29, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
Yes - I feel that though they are a little different, they are really the same, so I feel that they should get merged. Voted by:TheEgolf 00:28, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
No - They are very different as one is an accessory of the other. I've been using Qemu for about 2 years and only heard of Qemu-launcher just now so it is hardly a necessary component. Qemu is a complicated tool and adding another tool in to the article would only confuse things. Robert Brockway 16:28, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
No - I really don't think it belongs in this article, and it's not as though this is the only front-end for QEMU. --StuartBrady (Talk) 18:07, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
YES - I don't think that it's notable enough on its own. I think what would be a good idea is to have a separate section on different QEMU front-ends (there's another KQEMU unrelated to the virtualizer that actually runs it from KDE, and then EWOK), and if any of them becomes significant in its own right it can be forked into a separate article. Martin Ultima [ multima - talk - contribs - leave message ] 04:04, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
YES - As per Martin Ultima's comment. --Witchinghour 15:50, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Paravirtualization?
Why the article said that KQEMU uses paravirtualization? As KQEMU is closed source who knows that for sure? And I'm personally doubt that it is. 217.26.163.26 11:43, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
- Hmm, you're right. That was my brain fart -- it looks like KQEMU changes QEMU from a type 2 to a type 1 hypervisor. I'll remove the para* reference, but please feel free to add your own wisdom. :) ◉ ghoti 15:29, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] license factual details
I don't know if this is true. http://fabrice.bellard.free.fr/qemu/license.html says QEMU is under lgpl, only the accelerator module is proprietary. --71.198.173.255 09:39, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
- Even the kqemu (accelerator) module is GPL now. Robert Brockway 19:19, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] kqemu is now GPL
quite recent, but kqemu is now gpl 2... wish I could update and reword article, but *woosh* off to movie cinema I go... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.214.42.225 (talk) 06:17, 6 February 2007 (UTC).
yes kqemu is open source now. The article is outdated.--Hasanidin 22:10, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] contradiction
"This is accomplished by running user mode and virtual 8086 mode code directly on the host computer's CPU"
"and should theoretically benefit from KQEMU's speedup, if KQEMU supported VM86 mode which is not the case."
which one is correct? Plugwash 12:43, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Neither really. I've updated appropriately. AnthonyLiguori
[edit] VMware uses virtualization
It says that VMware doesn't do virtualization, right? If so, then that's not correct. Boches and non-accelerated QEMU are emulated at the CPU level. VMWare Workstation and the accelerated QEMU try to run as much code natively as possible. If you want sources for this information, please go to the websites of QEMU and VMWare or just compare their speeds to Boches and plain QEMU! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by JWhiteheadcc (talk • contribs) 23:41, 11 March 2007 (UTC).
