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

Re: [Xen-users] 2.6.32 Kernel Debian

  • To: "Olivier B." <xen.list@xxxxxxxxx>
  • From: Martinx - ジェームズ <thiagocmartinsc@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 14:00:59 -0300
  • Cc: xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Delivery-date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 10:03:24 -0700
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; b=IEBdkSDY0MTrrS/jhkzw7OOdlpOnAf5h6O/yMjKDyh9OZuN0Fh6bAS71mPg0hagXNx AoUnRM1iPmSlknbihlel4a28UCkV3UFT/vkSbweL+AwT0i2xtp68exhU8q8s8w8hsHuK hKI2O7hxiVngO+iiiYpsWPu9HRHDPc21IR83M=
  • List-id: Xen user discussion <xen-users.lists.xensource.com>


 For sure! I agree with you! Today I have, for the first time, the Xen, the Linux ( pvops dom0) and a composite enabled dom0 Desktop! I can see that this mess from the past is going to change... But when?

 The Debian team maybe can delay the freeze of the Squeeze for after the release of the Xen 4.0 and the pvops dom0 support in mainline Linux?


On 18 March 2010 13:53, Olivier B. <xen.list@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Well : who fix the security problems from the 2.6.18 ? And it doesn't boot at all on modern hardware.

Who use the dom0 kernel from lenny on production ? Me, at least on some simple setup, and the pv_ops kernel on others setup.
If my actual pv_ops kernel is part of Squeeze, I really really be happy to don't have to maintain it anymore.

The pv_ops dom0 kernel is the futur of Xen, so it's logic that Debian choose it for his *future* version.


On 18/03/2010 17:43, Martinx - ジェームズ wrote:

 The Xen and the Linux from http://xen.org is a rock solid.

 I REALLY do not understand why the Debian Xen Team just don't pack the Linux from http://xen.org for Squeeze dom0, if there are no stable options available out there.

 What is the point in make a hard work to get a unstable system? As the Lenny (dom0) and the Hardy (dom0), for example?!? No one actually are using it!

 I never use in a production environment, the Xen packaged from some distribution. They always have a bug here and there... Then I am forced to manually compile Xen and Linux from xen.org and all my problems go away as magic!

 And if Debian Squeeze works seamlessly with the Xen and the Linux, I believe that the maintainers of the Xen in the Debian SHOULD only pack the sources from xen.org WITHOUT any significant modifications. Of course, only when you want a dom0.

 Some will say that the Linux is prehistoric but, then why not use the same kernel used in the project XCP, the kernel- for the Squeeze? It is stable too and much more recent than the 2.6.18!


2010/3/18 Markus Hochholdinger <Markus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Am 17.03.2010 um 20:53 Uhr schrieb Martinx - ジェームズ
> Yeah!!! Great news!
>  http://packages.qa.debian.org/l/linux-2.6/news/20100317T161016Z.html
>  linux-image-2.6.32-4-xen-686 - Linux 2.6.32 for modern PCs, Xen dom0
> support
>  linux-image-2.6.32-4-xen-amd64 - Linux 2.6.32 for 64-bit PCs, Xen dom0
> support
>  It will be a paravirt_ops or the SUSE port forward?!

i'm not sure, it rumours it will be a pv_ops kernel. But till now i've found
no definite information about that.

Another info about the kernel:



_______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list

Xen-users mailing list

Xen-users mailing list



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