On Wed, 2008-07-16 at 12:35 +0200, maximilian attems wrote: > On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 12:51:21PM +0300, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 10:50:22AM +0200, maximilian attems wrote: > > > On Wed, 16 Jul 2008, Ben Hutchings wrote: > > > > > > > On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 05:22:55PM +0300, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: > > > > <snip> > > > > > Hopefully Jeremy Fitzhardinge (from Xensource) and others can get the > > > > > important Xen kernel features ported to pv_ops framework and > > > > > integrated > > > > > into vanilla linus kernels soon.. > > > > > > > > > > Status/todo: > > > > > http://wiki.xensource.com/xenwiki/XenParavirtOps > > > > > > > > > > Redhat/Fedora pv_ops Xen kernel dom0 support status: > > > > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/XenPvopsDom0 > > > > > > > > SLES 11 will include Linux 2.6.26 with Xen patches - packages should be > > > > available any day now from > > > > <ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/projects/kernel/kotd/SL110_BRANCH/i386/>. Is it > > > > possible that those patches will be usable in lenny, as I believe the > > > > kernel team expects to release with Linux 2.6.26? > > > > > > dom0 looks currently out of reach, > > > what we have is the snapshotting features of 2.6.27 for x86_32. > > > > > > > Hmm.. what do you mean with "out of reach" ? pv_ops dom0 is not yet > > ready/working, but those SLES 11 patches have the xensource (2.6.18 forward > > port) of dom0 and all the other xen kernel features for 2.6.26.. > > sorry but no please read > http://wiki.debian.org/DebianKernelPatchAcceptanceGuidelines > > pv_ops is the upstream way we enabled them in 2.6.25 and > enhance the existing 2.6.26 base. > what are you moaning?
Without dom0, lenny will be unusable for several installations of mine which presently run an ugly combination of etch's dom0 and lenny's kernel. I would like to do that in a different way. If we will not see dom0 in linux-2.6 on Debian, we should at least have a 2.6.18 tree with dom0. William
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
