[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Approaching VMware (and others) to get Debian listed as supported ?

On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 11:06:47AM -0500, Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Oct 2005, Ben Pfaff wrote:

> > "Yann Dirson" <dirson@debian.org> writes:

> > > Debian is not listed in the list of supported OS on the VMware website[1].
> > >  We all know here there is no reason for it not to work, especially given
> > > the huge number of other distros listed there, but in the corporate
> > > environment, yada, yada.

> [...]

> > It would probably be more difficult to get added to the list of
> > supported host operating systems.

> VMware talked to us about this at linuxworld once.  The problem is that most
> distros have one official blessed kernel for their releases.  Debian
> is more chaotic^Wdiverse so it is hard for them to do the QA to guarantee
> it will work for all Debian users.  Perhaps with all the work the kernel team
> is doing, they will change their minds for etch.  In the meantime, they
> are responsive to ideas that will make it easier for Debian users to use
> VMware.  That's what they told me anyway.

Er... does this mean they're unwilling to support (386,686,686-smp,k7,k7-smp)
flavors, or they're unwilling to support both a 2.4 and a 2.6 kernel, or
what?  Even in woody, this was as much variation as we had in kernels; there
may have been kernel version/feature skew between architectures, but last I
checked VMWare didn't work on those other archs anyway.  In sarge, there is
no longer kernel version skew between architectures, but the flavors are
still there, and this isn't going to change for etch.  (Maybe the 686{,-smp}
and k7{,-smp} flavors could be merged, but that's about it.)

Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
vorlon@debian.org                                   http://www.debian.org/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: