Re: What was the reason for enabling Xen on all i386 kernels?
On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 12:29:52PM -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> I would like to know why it was decided to enable Xen on all i386
> kernels. The changelog simply states it was done, which isn't exactly
> helpful, other than to show it apparently was on purpose and not an
> accident.
Because it is supported.
> Meanwhile amd64 kernels don't have it enabled. Why the difference?
Because it is not supported.
> Perhaps I am wrong, but I suspect the majority of users don't give a
> darn about xen support, while on the other hand quite a lot of people
> are quite annoyed at loosing the ability to use a lot of kernel modules
> that made their machines actually do what they wanted to do.
The Xen support only adds something, it does not remove something which
was there before.
> Certainly
> the nvidia and ati drivers are broken by this, and I am not sure how
> much convincing it would take to get either of them to fix it. I
> wouldn't be surprised if ndiswrapper is broken by this either, although
> I haven't used that lately.
Please define "broken". If they would be broken by paravirt support,
they would already fail to work with 2.6.24. Please take a look at
#481485.
> So really what is the point of making all kernels xen enabled when
> almost noone will actually use that feature, while at the same time
> causing lots of grief for a much larger group of users? Was having
> seperate xen flavour kernels really that big a deal?
Please show evidence that the support breaks something except random
scripts for non-free software.
Bastian
--
Prepare for tomorrow -- get ready.
-- Edith Keeler, "The City On the Edge of Forever",
stardate unknown
Reply to: