On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 06:47:25PM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote: > Because it is not supported.
OK, that is a good reason. > The Xen support only adds something, it does not remove something which > was there before. I was under the impression it changed some of the ways to access physical addresses. I guess for the dom0 kernel that wouldn't really make sense though. > Please define "broken". If they would be broken by paravirt support, > they would already fail to work with 2.6.24. Please take a look at > #481485. OK, I will try and work from that. And broken as in "it won't compile". :) > Please show evidence that the support breaks something except random > scripts for non-free software. So xen support should not break any driver? If that is the case, I will continue to try and fix the compile problem and try and make it build and then see if it does work. Certainly everything I found about it so far indicated that the xen changes would break driver access to the hardware in some cases, but I guess believing random stuff on the internet could be a bad idea. I am willing to try fixing it some more. -- Len Sorensen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
