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

Re: [Xen-devel] Fwd: [Xen-users] Missing 3.2 binary install package


  • To: jim burns <jim_burn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • From: Nico Kadel-Garcia <nkadel@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2008 11:17:18 +0000
  • Cc: xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Delivery-date: Sat, 01 Mar 2008 03:12:46 -0800
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=tuLE0MyvagAd3Y9smv+o1IYrOKlycw7lJtOF4Usx1f4+UjL9us9T6uBpcAYpZZe9c0OhFLz1uODlaXk7pMAyW89pkn8JkvHWq/DTQBSKVWngLH5g1PWz6TjTF990qLfOIgpcS9WnWaK1PoGX9fmHhBYdWsOdln0yPixs/EtFJDI=
  • List-id: Xen user discussion <xen-users.lists.xensource.com>

jim burns wrote:
On Thursday 28 February 2008 09:56:41 am Ian Jackson wrote:
Failing that, I would
suggest building the hypervisor or the kernel (whichever you don't
have) from the source tarballs on the xen.org website.  Vendors' dom0
kernels intended for 3.1 are generally useable with 3.2.

What are the limits here? Would the xen.gz 3.0.3 compiled with the dom0 kernel, such as found with Centos, work with the xen 3.2 tarball? I would assume the compatibility code would let it work, but what features would be unsupported/not functional? Thanx.
It should, it has for work I've done before. The DomU kernels are much more forward compatible with more recent Dom0 kernels than the reverse: it's not really suprising.

_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users


 


Rackspace

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