Ian Campbell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, 2008-08-08 at 17:00 +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
>> On Thursday 07 August 2008, Ian Campbell wrote:
>> > The patch below, when combined with an update to 2.6.26 (required for
>> > Xen's paravirtual framebuffer, I used Otavio's recent patches) allows
>> > Xen to be installed using the graphical interface when a virtual
>> > framebuffer is configured for the guest.
>>
>> My first question would be whether we really need/want a G-I variant for
>> Xen.
>
> I wasn't intending to to create a second Xen variant, but rather to
> enhance the existing one with the graphical option. (I think you
> realised that but thought I'd make sure)
I personally like the idea.
>> Given the target audience I would think that most admins of Xen
>> boxes will be more than happy and even prefer to use the newt interface.
>
> Possibly true. Basically I just thought it was neat and "all the other
> distros are doing it" ;-) (maybe not true, Fedora/RHEL do...).
I wouldn't like to wait for a new stable full cycle to get it on
stable and then I'm pro it.
>> Why not wait until we actually get requests from users?
>
> By the time they notice it'll be too late for Lenny? I'm hoping to
> update the wiki and lets some of the relevant Xen lists know about the
> daily builds over the weekend/early next week, to get some
> testing/gfeedback soon.
>
> Is there a downside to having g-i support in the Xen image? I'm not
> overly concerned about the size impact for this variant, (which is
> 5.3M->14M FWIW so not trivial).
Except from the size of the image, I see no issues.
--
O T A V I O S A L V A D O R
---------------------------------------------
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] UIN: 5906116
GNU/Linux User: 239058 GPG ID: 49A5F855
Home Page: http://otavio.ossystems.com.br
---------------------------------------------
"Microsoft sells you Windows ... Linux gives
you the whole house."
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
