FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > CentOS > CentOS Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 01-10-2008, 05:36 PM
Ian Jackson
 
Default Preview Xen 3.2 rc* packages

Xen 3.2 is in the final stages of preparation. We (Xen upstream) are
planning to provide binary packages for Centos 5.1, amongs others.

I've merged the patches and so on from xen-3.0.3-41.centos5.i386.rpm
with a recent xen-unstable RC tip (16701:8922a1469284). With a bit of
effort I have managed to get a set of packages which appear to be able
to work at least in my simple `does this function at all' test.

I'm mentioning it here so that you can have a look at what I've done
and comment on it. We'll probably be making official upstream rpms
very soon after the Xen 3.2 release, which we hope will be early next
week. Please send me feedback either here on-list or privately.

Most of the useful patches from 3.0.3-41.centos5 have been
incorporated upstream so I just deleted those from my srpm.

There were also a few changes which I have just dropped. In
particular, the RHEL5 package (and thus the Centos one too) is a
bizarre frankenxen containing a forward port of the 3.0 dom0 userland
tools to the Xen 3.1 hypervisor.

In my package I have included the hypervisor in the xen-*.rpm rather
than making a kernel package too. This is more in line with practice
upstream; dom0 kernel compatibility between the 3.1 and 3.2
hypervisors is good and the new hypervisor seems to work for me with
the Centos 5.1 2.6.18-53.el5xen kernel.

You can find the actual files here:
http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~ijackson/xen-3.2-package-previews/centos5.1/

These packages should not be used for production - they're previews
and I may have made elementary packaging mistakes. Xen 3.2 is still
unreleased and in need of more testing.

Please check the SHA256's before installing them:
8d1ab89c420559aac762e7b526b57f80434d45006c162713bd 2120b43868a385 xen-3.1.9-0xs.centos5.i386.rpm
380062047a72308996a568f177c60125582acb48c2df2c0811 f025542fa24367 xen-3.1.9-0xs.centos5.src.rpm
437b363c3f45a8e74db395468b127245fd775ddb9bd8b5e85f 1a4d8ec7809e04 xen-debuginfo-3.1.9-0xs.centos5.i386.rpm
2b81624aa303828b06bda11201a6f2eaf923c384830c8cff5d 3f53a22ebaf393 xen-devel-3.1.9-0xs.centos5.i386.rpm
dfef6550f4d693c999923ba9b2d5ead7b8bbeca3bed0cbdc08 35ca516d773ddc xen-libs-3.1.9-0xs.centos5.i386.rpm

Regards,
Ian.
_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
 
Old 01-10-2008, 06:01 PM
"Ross S. W. Walker"
 
Default Preview Xen 3.2 rc* packages

Ian Jackson wrote:
>
> Xen 3.2 is in the final stages of preparation. We (Xen upstream) are
> planning to provide binary packages for Centos 5.1, amongs others.
>
> I've merged the patches and so on from xen-3.0.3-41.centos5.i386.rpm
> with a recent xen-unstable RC tip (16701:8922a1469284). With a bit of
> effort I have managed to get a set of packages which appear to be able
> to work at least in my simple `does this function at all' test.
>
> I'm mentioning it here so that you can have a look at what I've done
> and comment on it. We'll probably be making official upstream rpms
> very soon after the Xen 3.2 release, which we hope will be early next
> week. Please send me feedback either here on-list or privately.
>
> Most of the useful patches from 3.0.3-41.centos5 have been
> incorporated upstream so I just deleted those from my srpm.
>
> There were also a few changes which I have just dropped. In
> particular, the RHEL5 package (and thus the Centos one too) is a
> bizarre frankenxen containing a forward port of the 3.0 dom0 userland
> tools to the Xen 3.1 hypervisor.
>
> In my package I have included the hypervisor in the xen-*.rpm rather
> than making a kernel package too. This is more in line with practice
> upstream; dom0 kernel compatibility between the 3.1 and 3.2
> hypervisors is good and the new hypervisor seems to work for me with
> the Centos 5.1 2.6.18-53.el5xen kernel.
>
> You can find the actual files here:
> http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~ijackson/xen-3.2-package-pr
> eviews/centos5.1/
>
> These packages should not be used for production - they're previews
> and I may have made elementary packaging mistakes. Xen 3.2 is still
> unreleased and in need of more testing.

I know I appreciate the effort you guys make to release these binaries
for the different platforms.

If I had only 2 wishes they would be, 1) try to make the install mimic
the distro's Xen path layout a little better, 2) provide 64-bit binaries...

Other then those two little points I have found the binaries pretty
stable.

Thanks,

-Ross

__________________________________________________ ____________________
This e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by
the addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged
and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient
of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribution or copying of this e-mail, and any attachments thereto,
is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error,
please immediately notify the sender and permanently delete the
original and any copy or printout thereof.

_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
 
Old 01-10-2008, 06:43 PM
"Ross S. W. Walker"
 
Default Preview Xen 3.2 rc* packages

Ross S. W. Walker wrote:
>
> Ian Jackson wrote:
> >
> > Xen 3.2 is in the final stages of preparation. We (Xen
> upstream) are
> > planning to provide binary packages for Centos 5.1, amongs others.
> >
> > I've merged the patches and so on from xen-3.0.3-41.centos5.i386.rpm
> > with a recent xen-unstable RC tip (16701:8922a1469284).
> With a bit of
> > effort I have managed to get a set of packages which appear
> to be able
> > to work at least in my simple `does this function at all' test.
> >
> > I'm mentioning it here so that you can have a look at what I've done
> > and comment on it. We'll probably be making official upstream rpms
> > very soon after the Xen 3.2 release, which we hope will be
> early next
> > week. Please send me feedback either here on-list or privately.
> >
> > Most of the useful patches from 3.0.3-41.centos5 have been
> > incorporated upstream so I just deleted those from my srpm.
> >
> > There were also a few changes which I have just dropped. In
> > particular, the RHEL5 package (and thus the Centos one too) is a
> > bizarre frankenxen containing a forward port of the 3.0
> dom0 userland
> > tools to the Xen 3.1 hypervisor.
> >
> > In my package I have included the hypervisor in the xen-*.rpm rather
> > than making a kernel package too. This is more in line
> with practice
> > upstream; dom0 kernel compatibility between the 3.1 and 3.2
> > hypervisors is good and the new hypervisor seems to work for me with
> > the Centos 5.1 2.6.18-53.el5xen kernel.
> >
> > You can find the actual files here:
> > http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~ijackson/xen-3.2-package-pr
> > eviews/centos5.1/
> >
> > These packages should not be used for production - they're previews
> > and I may have made elementary packaging mistakes. Xen 3.2 is still
> > unreleased and in need of more testing.
>
> I know I appreciate the effort you guys make to release these binaries
> for the different platforms.
>
> If I had only 2 wishes they would be, 1) try to make the install mimic
> the distro's Xen path layout a little better, 2) provide
> 64-bit binaries...
>
> Other then those two little points I have found the binaries pretty
> stable.

Ok, I gave it a whirl, the minor paths issue I mentioned earlier seems
to be fixed here, but the 'localtime' patch needs to be backported
(or forwardported in this case) as HVM clocks still only report time
in UTC.

-Ross

__________________________________________________ ____________________
This e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by
the addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged
and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient
of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribution or copying of this e-mail, and any attachments thereto,
is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error,
please immediately notify the sender and permanently delete the
original and any copy or printout thereof.

_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
 
Old 01-11-2008, 10:31 AM
Ian Jackson
 
Default Preview Xen 3.2 rc* packages

Ross S. W. Walker writes ("RE: [CentOS-devel] Preview Xen 3.2 rc* packages"):
> Ok, I gave it a whirl, the minor paths issue I mentioned earlier seems
> to be fixed here, but the 'localtime' patch needs to be backported
> (or forwardported in this case) as HVM clocks still only report time
> in UTC.

Which localtime patch is that ? I don't see anything relevant in the
patchset for the package I was using as a basis. If you could provide
a reference I'd be happy to take a look. (Was it submitted upstream?)

Ian.
_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
 
Old 01-11-2008, 12:43 PM
"Ross S. W. Walker"
 
Default Preview Xen 3.2 rc* packages

Ian Jackson wrote:
>
> Ross S. W. Walker writes ("RE: [CentOS-devel] Preview Xen 3.2
> rc* packages"):
> > Ok, I gave it a whirl, the minor paths issue I mentioned
> earlier seems
> > to be fixed here, but the 'localtime' patch needs to be backported
> > (or forwardported in this case) as HVM clocks still only report time
> > in UTC.
>
> Which localtime patch is that ? I don't see anything relevant in the
> patchset for the package I was using as a basis. If you could provide
> a reference I'd be happy to take a look. (Was it submitted upstream?)

Actually I think it is functionality that is in the 3.0.3 versions of
xm and xend that upstream mashed up with the 3.1 kernel to make it's
package.

I believe that the 'localtime' option broke in either of those utilities
when the HVM clock was moved from qemu to the Xen kernel.

Unless the option to have the clock use the local time has changed...

-Ross

__________________________________________________ ____________________
This e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by
the addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged
and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient
of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribution or copying of this e-mail, and any attachments thereto,
is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error,
please immediately notify the sender and permanently delete the
original and any copy or printout thereof.

_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 07:12 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org