[Fwd: Bug#454604: linux-2.6: Xen kernel packages for 2.6.22]
Scott
Per your subject and attachments. Hope this will be helpful.
I don't think your problem can be resolved at the current time because
of your kernel patch.
Below find correspondence and URLs which explain why.
* Brian Almeida:
> I've been unable to find an official debian kernel which has
> Xen supporter after 2.6.18-5 (released with etch). While I realize
> there were changes in later kernels that complicated the patches,
> Ubuntu has had Xen support for 2.6.22 for nearly 3 months (see
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-source-2.6.22/+bug/132726).
>
> Can you please integrate their Xen patchesets into the official Debian
> kernels?
The XenSource upstream is sort-of defunct these days. For some
background information, see:
<https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-xen/2007-November/msg00106.html>
<http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/XenPvops>
and...
from me:
I am a new subscriber with bug listing and have been following the BUGS.
I also am very confused and upset with how Debian development and bug
efforts regarding XEN seem to be avoided. I have followed XEN
development and bugs since the onset and attempted in vain to create any
aggressive interest in the debian-user list. At the time ETCH was released I spoke
to an individual in Xen development who was also concerned and he said
he would pressure release people in Debian to make some kind of special
allowance to add XEN into the ETCH distribution -- apparently he was
successful but there appears to be little effort to go further (to
incorporate changes and bugs) because of the way the release mechanism
works for Debian releases. So it appears -- until the next official
Debian release -- there will be no more changes.
There has to be a way of handling the situation for projects
external to Debian but need to be part of Debian. I suggest possibly
something like an unofficial release overlay such that these special
releases get utilized into the distribution but have no official
sanction -- which I think Ubuntu has essentially done. Ubuntu has
sufficient independence from Debian that it can deal with these kind of
issues it's own way. Debian should also have that kind of flexibility
but in a way that does not disrupt Debian releases. With all the
brilliant Debian developers, maintainers, and people with experience I
can not see how this kind of situation can persist.
Thanks -- Ted Hilts
Otavio Salvador wrote:
Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de> writes:
* Brian Almeida:
I've been unable to find an official debian kernel which has
Xen supporter after 2.6.18-5 (released with etch). While I realize
there were changes in later kernels that complicated the patches,
Ubuntu has had Xen support for 2.6.22 for nearly 3 months (see
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-source-2.6.22/+bug/132726).
Can you please integrate their Xen patchesets into the official Debian
kernels?
The XenSource upstream is sort-of defunct these days. For some
background information, see:
<https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-xen/2007-November/msg00106.html>
<http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/XenPvops>
Indeed.
Looks like XEN will have bad days until it's done for paravirt_ops
then :-)
See TOP of this email chain!
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
listmaster@lists.debian.org
Scott Edwards wrote:
Currently I have this installed on the host, running etch:
ii xen-hypervisor-3.0.3-1-amd64 3.0.3-0-4
The Xen Hypervisor
ii xen-ioemu-3.0.3-1 3.0.3-0-4
XEN administrative
ii xen-linux-system-2.6.18-5-xen-vserver-amd64 2.6.18.dfsg.1-13etch4
XEN system with Li
ii xen-tools 2.8-2
Tools to manage de
ii xen-utils-3.0.3-1 3.0.3-0-4
XEN administrative
ii xen-utils-common 3.0.3-0-2
XEN administrative
In a vserver guest (roughly root in a chroot with few capabilities) I
have sid installed. I setup this vserver guest primarily to isolate
the build env from the host. Both host and guest are amd64 in 64bit mode.
While trying to compile the xen-unstable source package, I ran into
bug #399700. I submitted a patch (attached) to use
linux-support-2.6.22-3 instead of linux-support-2.6.17-2.
I'm attempting to backport this (eventually) to etch to hopefully
overcome an issue where guests are unable to partition the disk. My
study of the disk image I provide them, shows no data is modified past
the partition table. I tried writing 0x00's and also 0xFF's to the
first 100 sectors or so with little to no success for the guest.
I decided to try the upstream 3.1.0 tarball, and after applying
changes to the makefiles (c/o warningsAreNoteErrors.sh.txt), A few new
warnings seen with a newer gcc (harmless?) allow the dist-tools and
dist-xen targets to compile. I skipped/ignored the dist-docs and
dist-kernels targets.
I uncommented export DH_VERBOSE=1 in debian/rules for the xen_d5...
transcript.
It's failing at
ld -m elf_i386 -Ttext 0x0 -s --oformat binary bootsect.o -o bootsect
ld: i386:x86-64 architecture of input file `bootsect.o' is
incompatible with i386 output
make[5]: *** [bootsect] Error 1
What else can I try?
Note: last email at top.
Reply to: