WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-users

[Xen-users] Re: usage of the extra parameter in vm configs

To: mark.williamson@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Xen-users] Re: usage of the extra parameter in vm configs
From: Bill Davidsen <davidsen@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2007 16:45:25 -0500
Cc: "xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Tue, 09 Jan 2007 01:11:56 -0800
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <Prayer.1.0.18.0612301553350.14270@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen user discussion <xen-users.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-users@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-users>, <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-users>, <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Organization: TMR Associates Inc, Schenectady NY
References: <5bb00b3f0612291512q2fb40f10n87800e4e3a56b634@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <5bb00b3f0612300737y21428f31idf92893cc618cff3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Prayer.1.0.18.0612301553350.14270@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.0.8) Gecko/20061105 SeaMonkey/1.0.6
M.A. Williamson wrote:
On 30 Dec 2006 15:18:20 +0000, M.A. Williamson <maw48@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
We'd actually been talking about replacing the current "root=", "extra="
etc. arguments with a single "cmdline=" which would contain the entire
kernel commandline - in the same way that a normal bootloader might.

I think that's a good idea, because that was the next question I
wanted to ask: what's the difference between the root variable (which
in all examples not only contains the root, but alo the additional
argument "ro") and extra, and why should I not  just add more
arguments to the root variable and leave the extra arg empty?

You could. Or you could stick them all in the "extra" argument. The only real reason that the variables are done this way is that it decouples the user from the realities of Linux a little... Additional variables used to be used to pass IP / NFS root information on the command line but I'm not sure if this is still done...

The config file parser isn't *very* aware of how Linux command line syntax works. At some stage it may be useful to make it more aware, for purposes of providing more helpful configuration warnings - however, this still doesn't really require the separate variables.

Out of interest, would anybody on the users list object to a general shift towards supplying the whole command line in one variable, rather than piecemeal in specially named fields? We wouldn't have to break backwards compatibility to do this...

I have to feel that the current setup is easier to read for infrequent users. And it makes support of new users easier, you can just tell them to set on value they can understand, and avoid 'where on the extras line?" questions.

And if you have to ask the value of one part of a command line, users can find the answer more easily if they're not familiar with the possibilities. It even makes comparing setups easier, tools like "diff" will isolate only what you have changed.

Being unambiguous reassures timid users.

--
bill davidsen <davidsen@xxxxxxx>
  CTO TMR Associates, Inc
  Doing interesting things with small computers since 1979

_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>