Re: Fixes to Etch kernel for use in a Xen domain 0
On 2008-08-28, Bastian Blank <waldi@debian.org> wrote:
> 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.
What about the Novell 2.6.26 forward-port?
Cheers,
Moritz
Reply to: