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

[Xen-users] Re: [Fedora-xen] another xen build and pvops kernel

  • To: xen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • From: Boris Derzhavets <bderzhavets@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2010 07:49:29 -0700 (PDT)
  • Cc: xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Delivery-date: Mon, 18 Oct 2010 07:51:26 -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:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=eUGkmXuyR+Q3rLR0t81FJOgzPiyLzGZ8CsC9nHUPXRrsy6biAVhRqwTnZK7nT+fmwWXZ4QDrk4KnUQrHVj0QQTsUMuVx7e5vaUOuqrWIiZFo+wAFXhyYnbM8759uIw6jbypt2VtjT//Wt2beTYaRwdbsVipbXHJRyxpW2O/cG1o=;
  • List-id: Xen user discussion <xen-users.lists.xensource.com>

Just wondering why kernel- cannot make itself
into F14. It seems pretty stable. Why it cannot be just a package available via "yum install" . Anyway Fedora's Libvirt has the best compatibility with Xen 4.0.1.
It's not too late switch back to Xen with PVOPS kernel. XenLinux aka Suse
is really dangerous . It outperforms pvops kernel about 15-20 % under Xen 4.0.1.
I don't mention KVM performance. It's not a competitor for OpenSuse 11.3 after the
most recent "zypper update"


--- On Mon, 10/18/10, M A Young <m.a.young@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

From: M A Young <m.a.young@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Fedora-xen] another xen build
To: xen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Monday, October 18, 2010, 6:17 AM

There is less urgency to test now because 4.0.1-6.fc14 has now made it
into F14 in time for the release. You can of course continue to test if
you want to.

    Michael Young
xen mailing list

Xen-users mailing list



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