Re: [PATCHES] 686-bigmem/Xen enabled netboot images
Frans Pop <elendil@planet.nl> writes:
> On Thursday 10 July 2008, Ian Campbell wrote:
>> First patch is to kernel wedge and adds the Xen block and net devices
>> (optional since they won't appear in the 486 images) as well as making
>> generic_serial optional in order to allow 686-bigmem kernel udebs to be
>> built. [kernel-wedge.patch]
>
> ! +++ packages/kernel/kernel-wedge/modules/nic-modules (working copy)
> ! +xen-netfront ?
> ! +++ packages/kernel/kernel-wedge/modules/scsi-modules (working copy)
> ! +xen-blkfront ?
>
> As these modules are only going to be used with the i386 -bigmem kernel
> and even only exist there, I wonder if we want them in kernel-wedge.
>
> In this case I think adding them only where they are actually used is
> preferable. That would mean adding them in relevant files in
> linux-kernel-di-i386-2.6/modules/i386/ instead.
In this specific case I disagree. Xen is going to be add on more
architectures in next releases and putting it on kernel-wedge makes
the update easier when this happen.
>> Final patch is the the installer itself to cause a 686-bigmem netboot
>> image to be built. [installer.patch]
<...>
> My proposal would be to use "netboot-xen" as internal name (the fact that
> we need the bigmem kernel for Xen is secondary to the purpose for which
> we build it IMO) and maybe "netboot/xen-bigmem" for the directory
> (EXTRANAME).
I agree on that too. It looks more logical indeed.
<...>
> BTW, I propose that you (if you're interested) are given commit access to
> the D-I repository on alioth so you can commit this yourself and maintain
> Xen (and maybe virtualization in general) support directly. I see you
> already have an account.
Full agree!
--
O T A V I O S A L V A D O R
---------------------------------------------
E-mail: otavio@debian.org UIN: 5906116
GNU/Linux User: 239058 GPG ID: 49A5F855
Home Page: http://otavio.ossystems.com.br
---------------------------------------------
"Microsoft sells you Windows ... Linux gives
you the whole house."
Reply to: