Daniel P. Berrange writes ("Re: xen-unstable => 3.2, binary packages"):
> On Mon, Dec 10, 2007 at 01:02:18PM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > I don't know what Fedora's policy is about including new upstream
> > versions in updates, but I would think that most sensible policies
> > would generally frown on pushing a new hypervisor into an
> > already-released distribution.
>
> Since the userspace and hypervisor have a pretty tight ABI requirement we
> cannot do major Xen upgrades during the life of any single Fedora release.
I don't necessarily disagree with your conclusion but I'm not sure
this reasoning makes sense. Certainly there's an ABI compatibility
requirement but all that means is that you would want to upgrade both
the hypervisor and the dom0 toolstack together.
> So, during the rawhide development cycles we track to the latest Xen major
> release, and then Fedora releases we track the minor bug fix release of
> Xen. So, Fedora 7 and 8 were released on Xen 3.1.0 and are now updated to
> Xen 3.1.2. We will not update Fedora 7 or 8 to Xen 3.2.0 because the
> 3.2.0 hypervisor is ABI incompatible with the 3.1.x userspace and vica-verca
So do you think it would be worthwhile for Xensource to make binary
packages of Xen 3.2 (both hypervisor and dom0 tools) backported to
Fedora 8 ?
Ian.
--
Fedora-xen mailing list
Fedora-xen@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-xen
