On 09/07/2011 09:57 AM, Always Learning wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2011-09-07 at 09:51 -0400, Digimer wrote:
>
>> Red Hat is a business, and made a simple business decision. Maintaining
>> Xen support would have meant maintaining a very large set of patches.
>> They made the decision that the effort (and money) needed to maintain
>> Xen outside of the mainline kernel was not worth it.
>
> Perhaps a silly question, but why maintain patches ? Why not compile a
> new version and discard all the patches ? Patches are a messy manner to
> maintain programmes.
That's the form they come from the community in. You'd have to ask the
devs for details.
>> KVM was not chosen over Xen so much as KVM was a much less expensive
>> hypervisor to support. As for it being mature or not; Well, put on your
>> kevlar pants because that is a matter of opinion.
>
> Which is better on C5 and C6 ?
For what? That is a loaded question.
For me, I use C5 + Xen when I am backing *nix VMs and c6 + KVM when
backing MS VMs as the PV drivers for windws are less than ideal.
>> As a follow-up, Xen dom0 support began getting into the mainline kernel
>> at 2.6.33 (EL6 is based on 2.6.32). It is very likely that we will see
>> Xen dom0 support returned in the next major release.
>
> In about 4 or 5 years ??? :-)
They tend to release a new x-stream release every three years. EL6 is a
year old, so I'd bet in two more years we will see EL7 and that both KVM
and Xen will be supported.
--
Digimer
E-Mail: digimer@xxxxxxxxxxx
Freenode handle: digimer
Papers and Projects: http://alteeve.com
Node Assassin: http://nodeassassin.org
"At what point did we forget that the Space Shuttle was, essentially,
a program that strapped human beings to an explosion and tried to stab
through the sky with fire and math?"
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
