Re: Fixes to Etch kernel for use in a Xen domain 0
On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 11:22:19AM -0600, dann frazier wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 09:36:53AM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 05:20:53PM -0600, dann frazier wrote:
> > > I'm not aware of any well-formed consensus yet - though there are
> > > several ideas. I'll caveat this by saying I don't follow Xen
> > > development at all, and didn't participate in the previous thread
> > > about this (very busy at the time), but I do think the approach that
> > > would be best for our users is to ship a 2.6.18-based kernel in
> > > lenny - aka, Bastian's Option 5:
> > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2008/07/msg00476.html
> >
> > What is the problem with Option 4?
>
> My two concerns with that are:
> * Dropping support for a package in a stable release (which we
> currently only do due to unforeseen circumstances) and
> * forcing users to upgrade to a new upstream version within a stable
> release.
So nothing in addition to my concerns. So we are back at the decision
between:
- Full support, which currently noone wants to handle.
- Support until we have something new, which breaks with some rules.
- No support.
I know its not really pretty, but for now its the best we can get IMHO.
Bastian
--
It would be illogical to assume that all conditions remain stable.
-- Spock, "The Enterprise Incident", stardate 5027.3
Reply to: