On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 03:51:10PM +0300, Pasi K?rkk?inen wrote: > 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. > > > > Redhat have contributed valuable work in areas like the paravirtual > > framebuffer device, and are working on 64-bit and dom0 support. But all > > of that is based on the work I've been doing on paravirt-ops > > infrastructure itself and the Xen implementation which uses it. > > > > Which reminds me that would be really nice to get a binary rpm for kernel-xen > with dom0 patches in it to try it and start reporting bugs.. :) This is intended to go into rawhide sometime in the reasonably near future, now that the critical F9 kerne-xen bugs have mostly been ironed out. 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
