On Fri, 2009-10-23 at 11:24 -0400, Noah Meyerhans wrote: > On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 05:08:15PM +0200, maximilian attems wrote: > > you still didn't read or get my question: > > Who will maintain the chosen pvops patch for the Squeeze lifetime? > > > > yes, this is the part of the work: > > * backward port important fixes, securtiy patches > > * read bug reports, decipher oopses and be able to fix them > > When I hear that this feature will be marked as "deprecated" in squeeze, > I interpret that to mean that it is supported, but that it is a legacy > feature and will be removed from future versions. In other words, I > assume that the kernel team has already decided how things will be > handled within squeeze. If this isn't what you mean by "deprecated", > could you please clarify what your intentions are, regarding Xen dom0 > suppport (pv-ops or otherwise), in squeeze, and in squeeze+1? [...] What we mean is that we don't intend to carry on patching Linux for enhanced Xen support and we cannot promise the same degree of support and stability that we provide for unpatched Linux. That said, I think you're right that mainline Linux is likely to have this enhanced Xen support by the time of squeeze+1. So it may be clearer to use some other term in the release notes. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings The obvious mathematical breakthrough [to break modern encryption] would be development of an easy way to factor large prime numbers. - Bill Gates
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part