On Sun, Jan 03, 2010 at 10:46:38AM +0100, Marc Haber wrote: > On Sun, 3 Jan 2010 16:55:27 +1100, Brian May <b...@snoopy.debian.net> > wrote: > >Like I said previously, I think dropping Xen support is a mistake because KVM > >requires QEMU and QEMU seems to have a reputation of being insecure. > > Xen is unsupportable due to clueless upstream, who has been in a > constant FAIL state regarding support of current kernels for years. >
For 6 months now (since summer 2009) xen-unstable (the development version) has been using pv_ops dom0 kernel as a default. pv_ops dom0 kernel is based on upstream kernel.org git tree (of Linus), so it has been pretty much in sync with the upstream Linux development. Currently it's at 2.6.31.6, but will get updated to 2.6.32.x when the main developer gets back from his christmas/NY break. Upcoming Xen 4.0 release will use pv_ops dom0 as a default kernel. So the change has happened, lthough it took painfully long to get the upstream Linux pv_ops framework in shape and all that.. and obviously the pv_ops dom0 patches still need to get merged upstream. pv_ops dom0 kernel definitely needs more testing still, so now it's a good moment to do some testing, if you're interested of this stuff. pv_ops dom0 kernel: http://wiki.xensource.com/xenwiki/XenParavirtOps If pv_ops dom0 is not what you want, there are many other Xen dom0 kernel options aswell: http://wiki.xensource.com/xenwiki/XenDom0Kernels -- Pasi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
