On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 11:32:12AM +0100, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > Kanwar Ranbir Sandhu wrote: > >On Wed, 2008-05-14 at 19:53 +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > > >>Sadly that's life with Xen. Upstream Xen has basically stopped all > >>kernel development leaving 'official' Xen kernels stuck on 2.6.28 which is > >>essentially useless for any modern distro. We had the choice between > >>trying > >>to finish off the paravirt_ops port, or dropping Xen entirely :-( > >> > > > >What's this? Xen kernel development has stopped? What does that mean - > >is the GPL project dead? > > Not at all. > > In fact, I'd strongly disagree with Daniel's characterisation that Xen > has "stopped all kernel development" Redhat need to "finish off" the > paravirt_ops port. I've been working on it full time for the last > couple of years, and have done the vast majority of the work needed to > get paravirt_ops working. When I said 'stopped all kernel development' I was referring to the original 'linux-xen-2.6' tree, which is what we've been shipping in Fedora until this point. Obviously paravirt_ops Xen development is still active & increasingly so. Regards, Dan. -- |: Red Hat, Engineering, Boston -o- http://people.redhat.com/berrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org -o- http://ovirt.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: GnuPG: 7D3B9505 -o- F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 :| -- Fedora-xen mailing list Fedora-xen@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-xen
