On Mon, 2010-01-04 at 10:38 +1100, Brian May wrote: > On Sun, Jan 03, 2010 at 09:49:24PM +0300, William Pitcock wrote: > > > Xen is unsupportable due to clueless upstream, who has been in a > > > constant FAIL state regarding support of current kernels for years. > > > > Do you have any proof for this claim? xen.git seems pretty up to date to > > me (2.6.31.6), and there are already people who are hacking on xen.git who > > have it working on 2.6.32, which means that xen.git will be up-to-date once > > Jeremy is back from holiday. > > I would assume he is thinking back to the release of Lenny, where it looked > like there wasn't going to be Xen support, or limited Xen support maybe, > because upstream were slow to update from 2.6.18. > > Fortunately Lenny did get Xen support, and for 2.6.26. We have had to carry that patch without any upstream support (or sharing with Novell, which eventually released SLES 11 with 2.6.27). As a result, the xen-flavour kernels for lenny are very buggy, particularly for domains with multiple vCPUs (though that *may* be fixed now). Ben. -- Ben Hutchings The obvious mathematical breakthrough [to break modern encryption] would be development of an easy way to factor large prime numbers. - Bill Gates
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part