Re: [Xen-users] What do you do for Xen 4.2?

[Peter Braun <xenware@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hello Giam Teck Choon

thank you very much for your answer.

You are doing great work with your repo!

I was wrong with the info that your repo isnt updated yet. Now I seed
that your repo is greatly maintained. Was looking for info only at
your blog.
Sorry for that!

Thank you again

Peter



2012/6/15 Teck Choon Giam <giamteckchoon@xxxxxxxxx>:
> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 8:17 PM, Peter Braun <xenware@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> There is security flaw but beside RHEL we dont see response on other
>> vendors yet.
>>
>> Is xen.org official tarbal updated yet?
>>
>> Both gitco.de and choon.net - there is no update yet.
>
> Sorry, since choon.net mentioned here so I will answer.  All security
> related I take it seriously and release packages accordingly mostly
> within 24 hours after testing.  Read http://choonrpms.blogspot.com/
> for more information.  Xen v4.0, v4.1 and even v4.2 (xen-unstable) are
> released accordingly:
>
> v4.0 - http://choonrpms.blogspot.com/2012/06/xen-404-215920-release.html
> v4.1 - http://choonrpms.blogspot.com/2012/06/xen-413-233010-release.html
> v4.2 - http://choonrpms.blogspot.com/2012/06/xen-420-254810-release.html
>
> In fact, I update often for xen related packages.  I don't update such
> information in my forum since I mentioned that I will post updates in
> http://choonrpms.blogspot.com/ since 09 Mar 2012 SGT/GMT+8.
>
> Hopefully this will clear any confusion or doubts.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Kindest regards,
> Giam Teck Choon
>
>
>> Even alpinelinux.org which I am very interested in has no xen
>> hypervisor update yet.
>> Another Xen 4.1.2 repo
>> http://www.crc.id.au/xen-on-rhel6-scientific-linux-6-centos-6-howto/
>> is not updated too.
>>
>> I don have Xenserver by citrix - is their product updated?
>>
>>
>> For 4.1.2 seems like only viable options are Debian Squeezy and Ubuntu
>> 12.04 right now.
>>
>> Br
>>
>> Peter
>>
>>
>> 2012/6/15 Jonathan Tripathy <jonnyt@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
>>>
>>> On 15/06/2012 12:02, George Dunlap wrote:
>>>
>>> On 15/06/12 11:54, Jonathan Tripathy wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 15/06/2012 11:50, George Dunlap wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 11:38 AM, Jonathan Tripathy <jonnyt@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi There,
>>>
>>> Sorry, I meant 4.1.x. Who are these vendors? Debian only seems to do 4.0.x
>>> and CentOS and Ubuntu don't offer Xen at all..
>>>
>>> Debian Squeeze offers 4.1, as does Ubuntu 12.04.
>>>
>>>  -George
>>>
>>> Well look at that!! Ubuntu does indeed seem to offer 4.1!!
>>> http://packages.ubuntu.com/precise/xen-hypervisor-4.1-amd64
>>>
>>> This means that the Xen page on the Ubuntu website is wrong!!
>>> https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Xen
>>> "Ubuntu 10.04 does not come with Xen binaries so you will have to manually
>>> download and compile Xen along with a kernel that is suitable to work with
>>> Xen"
>>>
>>> Hmm -- that will have to be changed. :-)
>>>
>>> I just assumed that future version didn't, but clearly they do.
>>>
>>> Is anyone aware of the Ubuntu teams commitment to Xen? I always thought that
>>> the Ubuntu folks were backing KVM...
>>>
>>> Canonical and Ubuntu are not opposed to Xen; in fact, the Canonical team has
>>> been pretty helpful in getting XCP working as a package you can install in
>>> Ubuntu, and also fixing Xen-related kernel bugs.  KVM is just their default
>>> at the moment, and therefore the focus of their own developers.  So more of
>>> the burden of making sure things work falls on the Xen community.
>>> Relationships with distros has been a weak point of xen.org in the past; but
>>> we're trying to address that going forward.
>>>
>>>  -George
>>>
>>> Thanks, George.
>>>
>>> So then, going forward, you recommend that we switch to Ubuntu+Xen (using
>>> Ubuntu Universe repo) if we want to use 4.1.x? As a company, we have plenty
>>> of experience with Ubuntu, so that's not an issue. I'm specially talking
>>> about the Xen aspects here. We just want to avoid having to compile Dom0
>>> kernels and Xen ourselves. While we're comfortable doing this during
>>> testing, we'd rather leave our production servers up to package management
>>> :)
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Xen-users mailing list
>>> Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> http://lists.xen.org/xen-users
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Xen-users mailing list
>> Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> http://lists.xen.org/xen-users

_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-users