On Tue, 2008-11-25 at 13:57 +, Ned Slider wrote:
> Tom Brown wrote:
> >
> >> Sounds good. After I clicked "send", I reread your post and realized
> >> that you didn't want xen (which, I believe, is depreciated).
> >
> >
> > what makes you think that ?
>
> Some are interpreting this:
>
>
Some are interpreting this:
http://www.redhat.com/promo/qumranet/
as an indication that xen will be dropped from RHEL6 as they direct
their efforts towards KVM.
makes sense
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman
Tom Brown wrote:
Sounds good. After I clicked "send", I reread your post and realized
that you didn't want xen (which, I believe, is depreciated).
what makes you think that ?
Some are interpreting this:
http://www.redhat.com/promo/qumranet/
as an indication that xen will be dropped from
Sounds good. After I clicked "send", I reread your post and realized
that you didn't want xen (which, I believe, is depreciated).
what makes you think that ?
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 3:35 PM, Sam Drinkard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Lanny Marcus wrote:
>> On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 11:58 AM, Sam Drinkard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> unexpected, I have to ask questions. I'm amazed that I missed the
>>> virtualization when I did the install.. I'm goin
Lanny Marcus wrote:
On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 11:58 AM, Sam Drinkard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
unexpected, I have to ask questions. I'm amazed that I missed the
virtualization when I did the install.. I'm going to blow it all away and
start fresh, mainly because I didn't like the default p
On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 11:58 AM, Sam Drinkard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> unexpected, I have to ask questions. I'm amazed that I missed the
> virtualization when I did the install.. I'm going to blow it all away and
> start fresh, mainly because I didn't like the default partitioning on the
> d
MHR wrote:
On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 12:53 PM, Sam Drinkard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Fabian Arrotin wrote:
Sam Drinkard wrote:
Subject pretty much says it all. I want the 5.2 without the xen kernel. I've grabbed
bits from 2 different mirrors and they all appear to have xen o
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Sam, please don't abandon threads you initiated yourself about the same
topic, this is noob behavior. You should know better by now. You waste
other people's time as they cannot know all content of all threads.
Kai
Kai,
I'm not abandoning the threads.. I have bee
Vandaman wrote:
Ralph Angenendt wrote:
Do not install "Virtualization" and you won't
have xen. There are no
different ISOs for "with xen" and "without
xen".
This means that the OP did not even bother checking the responses
to his question.
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/cento
Sam, please don't abandon threads you initiated yourself about the same
topic, this is noob behavior. You should know better by now. You waste
other people's time as they cannot know all content of all threads.
Kai
--
Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany
Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: ht
Ralph Angenendt wrote:
> Do not install "Virtualization" and you won't
> have xen. There are no
> different ISOs for "with xen" and "without
> xen".
>
This means that the OP did not even bother checking the responses
to his question.
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/2008-November/06812
Sam Drinkard wrote:
> Subject pretty much says it all. I want the 5.2 without the xen kernel.
> I've grabbed bits from 2 different mirrors and they all appear to have
> xen on them. It would be very nice if someone could throw some text
> into the mirrors file to differentiate the two "vers
On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 12:53 PM, Sam Drinkard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Fabian Arrotin wrote:
>>
>> Sam Drinkard wrote:
>>>
>>> Subject pretty much says it all. I want the 5.2 without the xen kernel.
>>> I've grabbed bits from 2 different mirrors and they all appear to have xen
>>> on th
Fabian Arrotin wrote:
Sam Drinkard wrote:
Subject pretty much says it all. I want the 5.2 without the xen
kernel. I've grabbed bits from 2 different mirrors and they all
appear to have xen on them. It would be very nice if someone could
throw some text into the mirrors file to differentiat
Sam Drinkard írta:
Subject pretty much says it all. I want the 5.2 without the xen kernel.
I've grabbed bits from 2 different mirrors and they all appear to have
xen on them. It would be very nice if someone could throw some text
into the mirrors file to differentiate the two "versions".. Oh
Sam Drinkard wrote:
Subject pretty much says it all. I want the 5.2 without the xen kernel.
I've grabbed bits from 2 different mirrors and they all appear to have
xen on them. It would be very nice if someone could throw some text
into the mirrors file to differentiate the two "versions".. O
17 matches
Mail list logo
