10:40:10 <fanta1> are there plans to keep supporting qemu/kvm in illumos in the future or is it EOL for now?
17:07:49 <jclulow> fanta1: I'm not aware of any significant maintenance effort going into it.  Bhyve has a lot of benefits and new work has all been in there.
17:08:11 <jclulow> Is there something you get from KVM that you can't from Bhyve?
17:09:37 <jclulow> I expect that SmartOS or maybe OmniOS folks will patch it if security issues are found, FWIW, but I'd encourage moving to Bhyve when you can 
19:01:25 <richlowe> I've been talking to hadfl about getting an updated qemu into omnios for a project, but probably separate from the kvm qemu
19:01:53 <richlowe> I seem to recall there's years of gap and interface stuff and weirdness that probably nobody has time to deal with illumos-kvm for.
19:02:00 <richlowe> but if you were just wanting qemu, that might be coming
19:11:46 <jclulow> Yeah, a QEMU for, say, emulating ARM or some other CPU, vs. a QEMU for accelerated x86 virtualisation, would be doable
19:22:48 <richlowe> yes, that's basically what we'd been talking about
19:49:01 <hadfl> yeah we got qemu 7.1.0 built. however, there are a few rough edges still that probably require patcing. the aim to add it is definitely to emulate different arch and not to replace the patched qemu for kvm
19:49:48 <hadfl> *patching
20:01:25 <jclulow> There are also tools like qemu-img that are pretty useful outside of QEMU altogether
20:08:32 <hadfl> iirc that's what solaris ships in their userland. just the tools but not the emulators
20:11:02 <jclulow> It is somewhat unfortunate generally that qemu-img (where updates are often welcome, for new formats) is stapled to the QEMU emulator (where updates just always break something, and should be avoided if possible)
20:13:15 <hadfl> probably worth to build/ship the tools in a separate package then?
20:23:32 <jclulow> I suspect it might be yes!