[Xen-japanese] Fwd: Re: [Fedora-xen] Goodbye Xen on RH/Fedora?

[Atsushi SAKAI <sakaia@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Fedoraは、Xenを切ったのかというスレッドで

RedHatの人も、Fedora11では、Dom0が入ると明言していますね。

とともに、KVMが競合技術であることもコメントしています。


以上

酒井


"Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>  Subject: Re: [Fedora-xen] Goodbye Xen on RH/Fedora?
>     Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 10:20:04 +0000
>     From: "Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange@xxxxxxxxxx>
>       To: Evan Lavelle <sa212+fcxen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Reply-To: "Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange@xxxxxxxxxx>
>       Cc: Fedora Xen <fedora-xen@xxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 08:15:00AM +0000, Evan Lavelle wrote:
> > It seems I've been a bit thick. It's been pretty obvious recently that 
> > Xen isn't flavour of the month around here, but I assumed there were 
> > good reasons for that. Now, rather belatedly, I've found
> > 
> > http://www.redhat.com/about/news/prarchive/2008/qumranet.html
> > 
> > In short, RedHat paid $107 million for Qumranet in September 2008. The 
> > acquisition includes KVM.
> > 
> > I've got 2 years invested in Xen, on FC8, and I can't help feeling that 
> > I've been shafted. Am I alone?
> 
> The acqusition of Qumranet has had absolutely *zero* impact on the 
> availability Xen kernels in Fedora. The sole reason for not having Xen
> support in Fedora 9/10 is that the Dom0 kernel is not yet merged upstream,
> and this problem existed long long before Qumranet joined Red Hat.
> 
> When we first shipped Xen in Fedora Core 5 (or was it 4?) none of the Xen
> code was merged into the mainline Linux kernel tree. For several releases
> we spent a great deal of time forward porting Xen to newer kernels. When
> we got to Fedora 9 the guest side was merged into the main kernel, but
> the host side was not. Unfortunately the Xen host kernel was still on
> 2.6.18 while Fedora was on 2.6.24 and the kernel was just too old to work
> with the userspace tools. We did not want to drop Xen Dom0 host from 
> Fedora 9, but we had no viable options to continue with it in the short
> term.
> 
> Since that time though, Jeremy Fitzhardinge has done alot of work on 
> getting Dom0 patches in shape for merging in upstream Linux. It it still
> hard to say just when these will be accepted upstream, but there is a
> semi-reasonable we'll be able to turn Xen Dom0 back on in Fedora 11
> kernels. 
> 
> While we (Red Hat) think KVM is a very compelling technology, as long as
> Xen is open source, actively maintained upstream & in mainline Linux 
> kernels, there's no reason why it shouldn't be available in Fedora. So 
> once the Dom0 kernel is merged, Fedora users will be able to have a choice
> between Xen and KVM for many future releases. We have also put effort into 
> developing Xenner which  allows paravirt Xen guests to be run under KVM
> without having to re-configure the guest kernel, giving people a potential
> migration strategy if they need one. 
> 
> As for RHEL-5, that continues to support Xen, and will do for the entire
> of its 7 year lifetime. If you don't want official Red Hat support, there
> is also the option of using CentOS 5 as a Xen host which again will have
> Xen support it in for whole of its 7 year lifetime. 
> 
> So while it is definitely unfortunate that we don't have a Xen Dom0 kernel
> in Fedora 9/10, we are *not* trying to shaft anyone & will re-introduce
> Xen Dom0 kernels to Fedora when they become available.
> 
> Regards,
> Daniel
> -- 
> |: Red Hat, Engineering, London   -o-   http://people.redhat.com/berrange/ :|
> |: http://libvirt.org  -o-  http://virt-manager.org  -o-  http://ovirt.org :|
> |: http://autobuild.org       -o-         http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
> |: GnuPG: 7D3B9505  -o-  F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 :|
> 
> --
> Fedora-xen mailing list
> Fedora-xen@xxxxxxxxxx
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-xen



_______________________________________________
Xen-japanese mailing list
Xen-japanese@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-japanese