3

I posted this question here: How are virtual machine integration packages implemented internally?, but it was closed as too broad. Originally, it asked about how are integration features implemented in several popular emulators, but now I narrowed it down to just one. Is it still too broad? If it isn't, can it be reopened and answered?

  • 1
    I don't think the question is too broad because it would cover different vendors. I think it was voted too broad because it appears to affect so many different components. Personally, I think it's a nice question. – Der Hochstapler Dec 10 '13 at 16:59
1

I reopened it.

I didn't feel like the question was actually too broad. Of course, the actual implementation details are too broad of a topic to discuss here, but I don't think that's what's being asked here.

A general overview of the concept of how a virtualization solution communicates with a guest operating system though these integration features is very much within the scope of our site and can be answered reasonably.

  • If I were to roll back the question to the point where it asks about several emulators, would it be too broad or would it still fit? – gparyani Dec 10 '13 at 18:24
  • @gparyani In my opinion, the way the hypervisor communicates with the guest through these "extensions" is always the same. Implementation details will differ, but the purpose and means to achieve it will be identical. – Der Hochstapler Dec 10 '13 at 18:28
  • I flagged a comment on the question that says it is too broad as obsolete - would that be deemed helpful or declined? – gparyani Dec 10 '13 at 18:31
  • @gparyani It was removed since it's basically Meta discussion that should go, well, here on Meta, if needed. – slhck Dec 10 '13 at 20:32

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .