Dulloor wrote:
> Is anyone able to boot 2.6.18-xen on 9.04 ubuntu (pvops is fine).
>
> - mountroot in my initramfs fails, cause udev doesn't set up any block
> /dev/<...>.
> - All required modules seem to be loaded (checked both in scripts and at
> initramfs shell), but obviously something is missing in 2.6.18
>
> -dulloor
>
> On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 6:42 AM, Tim Post <
echo@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Sorry for top posting, another case in point:
>>
>> Depending on the distro, 'awk' might not work for configuring Linux. A
>> warning could be generated telling the user that installing 'gawk' might
>> be a good idea.
>>
>> Moreover, we warn about the absence of hg, git, bcc, etc.
>>
>> The idea is, if the 'check' script spews stderr to some file, that file
>> becomes a list of stuff that the user would (probably) want to install.
>>
>> Again, I am in NO way suggesting ./configure --enable-kernels
>> --enable-ocaml-stubdom , etc, nor am I suggesting that the script create
>> Makefiles. I could do that, I would NOT want to maintain it, neither
>> would anyone else on this list.
>>
>> Said script could also 'better advertise' other targets in the Makefile,
>> i.e. if Mercurial is not installed. At the least, as a 'general
>> failure', make help could be advertised.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> --Tim
>>
>> On Thu, 2009-05-21 at 18:27 +0800, Tim Post wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2009-05-21 at 05:53 -0400, Dulloor wrote:
>>>> Keir et al -
>>>>
>>>> I am on ubuntu and every time I upgrade my distro (dom-0), I end up
>>>> spending half-a-day getting xen working again, like this time on
>>>> moving to jaunty/karmic (problem booting 2.6.18 based xen and then
>>>> python version).
>>>>
>>>> Which distro do the xensource guys use for their development ? All I
>>>> am interested in is xen development/test environment.
>>>>
>>>> -dulloor
>>> You might consider just building Xen from source (tools and hypervisor),
>>> which takes it completely out of the scope of your package manager.
>>>
>>> I know that is taboo in some circles, however it gives you greater
>>> flexibility when upgrading, while also giving you the ability to test
>>> experimental patches.
>>>
>>> The problem is, doing this often violates enterprise warranties. 99.9%
>>> of the time, I'd rather just trust my distro when it comes to packages.
>>>
>>> When it comes to Xen, I usually recommend (and install) the latest
>>> faithful official release. The one and only time I just used distro
>>> packages was with Ubuntu Hardy (LTS) .. and that was chaotic (time going
>>> backwards, etc).
>>>
>>> There was once a universal installer script .. can that be resurrected
>>> and possibly rely on m4 being present for developers? Using that, the
>>> user knows with no uncertainty exactly what they are missing (and what
>>> version is needed).
>>>
>>> For instance, a dependency on 32 bit stubs when building on x86_64.
>>>
>>> It does not have to be named ./configure, it does not have to create
>>> makefiles and I am happy to maintain it. The drawback is 6k+ lines of
>>> generated shell code that has to be tracked in the hg.
>>>
>>> It could be ... scripts/checkbuildconfig .. or whatever. It would not be
>>> a configuration tool, just a diagnostic tool that offers hints on what
>>> is needed to build.
>>>
>>> Why clutter the Makefile needlessly? A script would be more portable,
>>> anyway.
>>>
>>> This approach has solved this exact problem for decades.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> --Tim
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Xen-devel mailing list
>>>
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Xen-devel mailing list
>>
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
>>
>
>
