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

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



> Makes perfect sense to move over to pvops (in mainline) directly :
> - Many of us have already used pvops-git and it works
> - Other branches (2.6.27/29/30 or whatever) would be a single-chunk
> forward port, with more scope for latent bugs (and no long-term benefits).
> - We anyway need to make pvops happen. The more we wait, greater will be
> the feature parity.
> ... and many more reasons.

One of the reasons cited for sticking on 2.6.18 was that it would hopefully 
encourage folk to use pv_ops if they wanted anything more modern. I'm not sure 
that worked out too well...

One argument for using 2.6.27 is that I believe it's the kernel used by SLES11, 
so there should be good availability of drivers backported to it. It strikes me 
it's not a bad plan to have two trees, one based off the latest stable 
enterprise distro (in this case SLES11), and the pvops tree based off the 
latest kernel.org release.

Ian



_______________________________________________
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®.