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 > Debian > Debian Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 07-16-2008, 06:44 PM
Pasi Kärkkäinen
 
Default Xen status in lenny?

On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 07:26:48PM +0200, maximilian attems wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 07:53:52PM +0300, Teodor wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 2:49 PM, Pasi Kärkkäinen <pasik@iki.fi> wrote:
> > >> > > See: http://wiki.xensource.com/xenwiki/XenParavirtOps
> > >> > > I think x86-64 xen patches are going in for 2.6.27..
> > >
> > > Lenny will not support 64bit, no dom0.. so basicly lenny can only be used as
> > > a 32bit domU .. unless people build/get some other dom0 kernel.
> >
> > What about the patches for x86-64 support in domU? If these are going
> > to be included in 2.6.27 does it mean they qualify [1] to be included
> > in the kernel for lenny?
>
> no.
> please read a thread before posting to it, that question is already
> answered twice.
>

btw out of curiosity do you know if the kernel patch policy was different
earlier (for etch), because xen kernel for etch (2.6.18-*-xen-686) contains
non-upstream xen patches (from xensource)..

-- Pasi


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 07-16-2008, 06:56 PM
maximilian attems
 
Default Xen status in lenny?

On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 09:44:00PM +0300, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 07:26:48PM +0200, maximilian attems wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 07:53:52PM +0300, Teodor wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 2:49 PM, Pasi Kärkkäinen <pasik@iki.fi> wrote:
> > > >> > > See: http://wiki.xensource.com/xenwiki/XenParavirtOps
> > > >> > > I think x86-64 xen patches are going in for 2.6.27..
> > > >
> > > > Lenny will not support 64bit, no dom0.. so basicly lenny can only be used as
> > > > a 32bit domU .. unless people build/get some other dom0 kernel.
> > >
> > > What about the patches for x86-64 support in domU? If these are going
> > > to be included in 2.6.27 does it mean they qualify [1] to be included
> > > in the kernel for lenny?
> >
> > no.
> > please read a thread before posting to it, that question is already
> > answered twice.
> >
>
> btw out of curiosity do you know if the kernel patch policy was different
> earlier (for etch), because xen kernel for etch (2.6.18-*-xen-686) contains
> non-upstream xen patches (from xensource)..

xen upstream back then ported forward their own patches *and* everybody
expected their patches to be merged. earliest merge plans were floating
for 2.6.15.

reliance on external patches is always bad, kvm is in kernel.
it doesn't try to duplicate dog and cat, but uses linux scheduler
itself and so on..

also if release team still decides to push for 2.6.25, which is
possible if 2.6.26 turns out bad, you still have much less xen
features.

--
maks


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 07-16-2008, 06:56 PM
maximilian attems
 
Default Xen status in lenny?

On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 09:44:00PM +0300, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 07:26:48PM +0200, maximilian attems wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 07:53:52PM +0300, Teodor wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 2:49 PM, Pasi Kärkkäinen <pasik@iki.fi> wrote:
> > > >> > > See: http://wiki.xensource.com/xenwiki/XenParavirtOps
> > > >> > > I think x86-64 xen patches are going in for 2.6.27..
> > > >
> > > > Lenny will not support 64bit, no dom0.. so basicly lenny can only be used as
> > > > a 32bit domU .. unless people build/get some other dom0 kernel.
> > >
> > > What about the patches for x86-64 support in domU? If these are going
> > > to be included in 2.6.27 does it mean they qualify [1] to be included
> > > in the kernel for lenny?
> >
> > no.
> > please read a thread before posting to it, that question is already
> > answered twice.
> >
>
> btw out of curiosity do you know if the kernel patch policy was different
> earlier (for etch), because xen kernel for etch (2.6.18-*-xen-686) contains
> non-upstream xen patches (from xensource)..

xen upstream back then ported forward their own patches *and* everybody
expected their patches to be merged. earliest merge plans were floating
for 2.6.15.

reliance on external patches is always bad, kvm is in kernel.
it doesn't try to duplicate dog and cat, but uses linux scheduler
itself and so on..

also if release team still decides to push for 2.6.25, which is
possible if 2.6.26 turns out bad, you still have much less xen
features.

--
maks


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 07-16-2008, 07:03 PM
Pasi Kärkkäinen
 
Default Xen status in lenny?

On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 08:56:24PM +0200, maximilian attems wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 09:44:00PM +0300, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 07:26:48PM +0200, maximilian attems wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 07:53:52PM +0300, Teodor wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 2:49 PM, Pasi Kärkkäinen <pasik@iki.fi> wrote:
> > > > >> > > See: http://wiki.xensource.com/xenwiki/XenParavirtOps
> > > > >> > > I think x86-64 xen patches are going in for 2.6.27..
> > > > >
> > > > > Lenny will not support 64bit, no dom0.. so basicly lenny can only be used as
> > > > > a 32bit domU .. unless people build/get some other dom0 kernel.
> > > >
> > > > What about the patches for x86-64 support in domU? If these are going
> > > > to be included in 2.6.27 does it mean they qualify [1] to be included
> > > > in the kernel for lenny?
> > >
> > > no.
> > > please read a thread before posting to it, that question is already
> > > answered twice.
> > >
> >
> > btw out of curiosity do you know if the kernel patch policy was different
> > earlier (for etch), because xen kernel for etch (2.6.18-*-xen-686) contains
> > non-upstream xen patches (from xensource)..
>
> xen upstream back then ported forward their own patches *and* everybody
> expected their patches to be merged. earliest merge plans were floating
> for 2.6.15.
>

Ok. This is what I expected happened back then.

> reliance on external patches is always bad, kvm is in kernel.
> it doesn't try to duplicate dog and cat, but uses linux scheduler
> itself and so on..
>

Yep.

> also if release team still decides to push for 2.6.25, which is
> possible if 2.6.26 turns out bad, you still have much less xen
> features.
>

Indeed. This is why the situation with Xen for Lenny is really problematic..

-- Pasi


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 07-16-2008, 07:03 PM
Pasi Kärkkäinen
 
Default Xen status in lenny?

On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 08:56:24PM +0200, maximilian attems wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 09:44:00PM +0300, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 07:26:48PM +0200, maximilian attems wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 07:53:52PM +0300, Teodor wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 2:49 PM, Pasi Kärkkäinen <pasik@iki.fi> wrote:
> > > > >> > > See: http://wiki.xensource.com/xenwiki/XenParavirtOps
> > > > >> > > I think x86-64 xen patches are going in for 2.6.27..
> > > > >
> > > > > Lenny will not support 64bit, no dom0.. so basicly lenny can only be used as
> > > > > a 32bit domU .. unless people build/get some other dom0 kernel.
> > > >
> > > > What about the patches for x86-64 support in domU? If these are going
> > > > to be included in 2.6.27 does it mean they qualify [1] to be included
> > > > in the kernel for lenny?
> > >
> > > no.
> > > please read a thread before posting to it, that question is already
> > > answered twice.
> > >
> >
> > btw out of curiosity do you know if the kernel patch policy was different
> > earlier (for etch), because xen kernel for etch (2.6.18-*-xen-686) contains
> > non-upstream xen patches (from xensource)..
>
> xen upstream back then ported forward their own patches *and* everybody
> expected their patches to be merged. earliest merge plans were floating
> for 2.6.15.
>

Ok. This is what I expected happened back then.

> reliance on external patches is always bad, kvm is in kernel.
> it doesn't try to duplicate dog and cat, but uses linux scheduler
> itself and so on..
>

Yep.

> also if release team still decides to push for 2.6.25, which is
> possible if 2.6.26 turns out bad, you still have much less xen
> features.
>

Indeed. This is why the situation with Xen for Lenny is really problematic..

-- Pasi


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 07-16-2008, 07:09 PM
Moritz Muehlenhoff
 
Default Xen status in lenny?

Bastian Blank wrote:
> Xen got a often used technique in the last two years. All of the large
> distributions got some sort of support for it. Debian Etch have full
> support for it. There was several requests of various people so I think
> not providing at least a minimal support in Lenny is wrong.
>
> I think option 4 would be the solution which produces the least amount
> of extra work and provides our users with support for there systems. I
> would provide the necessary packages but I want an okay for that
> solution from the security and the release team.

Since there's now a sixth option - the forward-ported XenSource patch to
SLES's 2.6.26 - could we test this patch before we decide on a plan?

To me using the forward-ported SLES patch for Lenny and switching to pvops
post-Lenny seems ideal.

Cheers,
Moritz


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 07-17-2008, 02:34 PM
Pasi Kärkkäinen
 
Default Xen status in lenny?

On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 09:09:52PM +0200, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> Bastian Blank wrote:
> > Xen got a often used technique in the last two years. All of the large
> > distributions got some sort of support for it. Debian Etch have full
> > support for it. There was several requests of various people so I think
> > not providing at least a minimal support in Lenny is wrong.
> >
> > I think option 4 would be the solution which produces the least amount
> > of extra work and provides our users with support for there systems. I
> > would provide the necessary packages but I want an okay for that
> > solution from the security and the release team.
>
> Since there's now a sixth option - the forward-ported XenSource patch to
> SLES's 2.6.26 - could we test this patch before we decide on a plan?
>
> To me using the forward-ported SLES patch for Lenny and switching to pvops
> post-Lenny seems ideal.
>

Yes, that would be ideal solution for users that want to have full-featured
Xen in Lenny.

But if you read the other messages in this thread, it won't happen I guess

That SLES forward-port for 2.6.26 is not acceptable based on Debian kernel
patch policy: http://wiki.debian.org/DebianKernelPatchAcceptanceGuidelines

-- Pasi


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 07-17-2008, 03:08 PM
Peter Jordan
 
Default Xen status in lenny?

Pasi Kärkkäinen, 07/17/2008 04:34 PM:

> On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 09:09:52PM +0200, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
>> Bastian Blank wrote:
>> Since there's now a sixth option - the forward-ported XenSource patch to
>> SLES's 2.6.26 - could we test this patch before we decide on a plan?
>>
>> To me using the forward-ported SLES patch for Lenny and switching to pvops
>> post-Lenny seems ideal.
>>
>
> Yes, that would be ideal solution for users that want to have full-featured
> Xen in Lenny.
>
> But if you read the other messages in this thread, it won't happen I guess
>
> That SLES forward-port for 2.6.26 is not acceptable based on Debian kernel
> patch policy: http://wiki.debian.org/DebianKernelPatchAcceptanceGuidelines
>
> -- Pasi
>
>

but is it acceptable to stop support for many debian etch xen dom0 machines?

PJ


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 07-17-2008, 10:45 PM
Bastian Blank
 
Default Xen status in lenny?

On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 05:34:28PM +0300, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> That SLES forward-port for 2.6.26 is not acceptable based on Debian kernel
> patch policy: http://wiki.debian.org/DebianKernelPatchAcceptanceGuidelines

Which is only the case for the main images. We have support for
additional feature sets, which have less strict rules.

Bastian

--
A little suffering is good for the soul.
-- Kirk, "The Corbomite Maneuver", stardate 1514.0


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 07-17-2008, 11:04 PM
maximilian attems
 
Default Xen status in lenny?

On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 12:45:21AM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 05:34:28PM +0300, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> > That SLES forward-port for 2.6.26 is not acceptable based on Debian kernel
> > patch policy: http://wiki.debian.org/DebianKernelPatchAcceptanceGuidelines
>
> Which is only the case for the main images. We have support for
> additional feature sets, which have less strict rules.

right but still no excuse to bring in a patch set that is *known*
to not be merged upstream.

--
maks


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 08:53 AM.

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