[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xen-devel] Future of xenbits Linux trees


  • To: Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Jean Guyader <jean.guyader@xxxxxxxxx>
  • From: Boris Derzhavets <bderzhavets@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2009 11:01:51 -0700 (PDT)
  • Cc: "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Delivery-date: Thu, 04 Jun 2009 11:02:23 -0700
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Date:From:Subject:To:Cc:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=p2DMeWgiMykAGwAefqGuSfnfLEZNk0M9iS3MfTdSYkeBDKvkJe1pnPKXmWkVYSxQ3Lq1hdWk12XVQM73GsoJil7KGCQ2wTQmxjkZR1SDPjT4mR+YgLnmsVF1aHkaEJIXsmCk6PZvL+2DvbnexFfTVatHUoI/H0k1QCTSfI+dYgY=;
  • List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>

>> Our proposal is to move XCI's linux-2.6.27 tree out of the XCI subproject
>> and make it the main user tree. Development and automated testing would
. . . . . .

> This tree is not tied up with XCI at all.
> It can be taken as it and runs on the top of mainstream xen.

How to checkout this tree ?

Boris.

--- On Thu, 6/4/09, Jean Guyader <jean.guyader@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

From: Jean Guyader <jean.guyader@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Future of xenbits Linux trees
To: "Keir Fraser" <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thursday, June 4, 2009, 12:09 PM

2009/6/4 Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> Folks,
>
> With 3.4 out the door it is time to revisit the state of our Linux
> repositories. Currently we have a number of trees in various states of
> maintenance:
>  - linux-2.6.18-xen.hg: the 'original' tree. Still maintained, used and
> tested but increasingly long in the tooth.
>  - ext/linux-2.6.27-xen.hg: a snapshot of opensuse's kernel port. This
> clones tree is not maintained or tested.
>  - XCI/linux-2.6.27.git: a forward port of the Xen patches to 2.6.27.
> Maintained as part of XCI project.
>  - Jeremy's pv_ops patches against kernel.org: maintained, (somewhat)
> tested, but incomplete.
>
> It is probably time to kill the 2.6.18 tree, or at least stop active
> development within it. It is increasingly a kludged collection of backports
> of more recent kernel patches, and is also missing a lot of drivers for more
> modern hardware.
>
> Our proposal is to move XCI's linux-2.6.27 tree out of the XCI subproject
> and make it the main user tree. Development and automated testing would
> occur on that tree and of course on Jeremy's pv_ops patchset (which we want
> to completely move onto at some point in the future).
>
> What do people think of this as a plan?
>

This tree is not tied up with XCI at all.
It can be taken as it and runs on the top of mainstream xen.

Jean

_______________________________________________
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

 


Rackspace

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.