Re: [Pkg-xen-devel] Re: Packaing Xen 3.0 etc for Debian
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, Sven Luther <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Jurij Smakov <email@example.com>, Matthew Grant <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Bastian Blank <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: [Pkg-xen-devel] Re: Packaing Xen 3.0 etc for Debian
- From: maximilian attems <email@example.com>
- Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2006 01:06:30 +0100
- Message-id: <[🔎] 20060301000630.GC4466@nancy>
- Mail-followup-to: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, Sven Luther <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Jurij Smakov <email@example.com>, Matthew Grant <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Bastian Blank <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org
- In-reply-to: <[🔎] 20060228095739.GB18157@tennyson.dodds.net>
- References: <[🔎] email@example.com> <[🔎] 20060224152223.GA9352@tie> <[🔎] 20060224153755.GA10832@wavehammer.waldi.eu.org> <[🔎] 20060224155424.GA25842@abydos.adm.naquadah.org> <[🔎] 20060224160533.GB10832@wavehammer.waldi.eu.org> <[🔎] Pine.LNX.4.63.0602240843060.3186@bobcat> <[🔎] 20060227125151.GB3881@localhost.localdomain> <[🔎] 20060227131510.GA8220@tie> <[🔎] 20060228085917.GC11979@nancy> <[🔎] 20060228095739.GB18157@tennyson.dodds.net>
On Tue, 28 Feb 2006, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 09:59:17AM +0100, maximilian attems wrote:
> > as the xen userspace is tightly integrated to the xen kernel,
> > it makes a lot of sense to release both in the same run.
> But it doesn't make sense to release them both as part of the same source
sure that was never proposed.
> and it doesn't necessarily make sense to keep them in the same svn
> repo. Can you explain why it's better for the xen userspace/hypervisor
> packages to be kept under the aegis of the kernel team, instead of for
> Bastian (and other interested developers) to join the pkg-xen team? Is
> there really so much more interest in the xen-tools among the members of the
> kernel team than among the, er, Xen team?
yes we want to release etch with Xen!
not like sarge were uml received not the love it should have received.
the 3.0 hypervisor is communicating through procfs. lkml patches have
shown sysfs patches trying to reimpleiment procfs code and more recently
purer sysfs interfaces. i expect some more churns in that direction,
so a tight cooperation is needed.
the separted repo and lists to track are at this stage more a nuisance
than a help.
> Holding all the members of the pkg-xen team responsible for what one of
> their fellows has written in his blog would be petty and immature, and would
> not exactly be the kind of encouragement one would hope to see from the
> kernel team seeking the input of others interested in Xen packaging.
i'm relying on xen at my work place. i'm very interested in xen packaging.
as it allows me to easily test initramfs-tools on various setups.
firing up roots on lvm2, md0 or whatever..
looking forward to switch from handbuild rsynced chroots to fine debs ;)
so the xen team needs either to come with us or allow more of us to join.
also basing their repo on waldi's work.