On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 10:44 AM, Ray Van Dolson <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 04, 2009 at 08:36:09AM -0800, inode0 wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 10:12 AM, Ray Van Dolson <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Some of this is a product RH acquired. I know they are working to >> > replace the Windows version with a fully platform independent version, >> > that wasn't realistic for this initial release. >> > >> > I'm sure there was many an internal debate on whether or not to wait on >> > delivery until the Windows portion could be replaced... obviously they >> > decided it would be better to move to market sooner. >> >> I just wish they would release RHEV-H independently of RHEV-M. >> Wouldn't a KVM based Red Hat supported "ESXi" be great for the same >> reasons ESXi exists? For the smaller customers who don't really need >> RHEV-M or don't want to touch it in its current form to dip their feet >> into the water? >> >> Maybe I'm just dreaming ... because RHEV-H is pretty much all I want >> for some of my personal use cases. >> > > Won't they essentially need to release RHEV-H anyways? I guess not in > a pretty-packaged format, but it's just a stripped down Linux kernel > correct? > > I guess it wouldn't include a "single node" version of RHEV-M though > (it requires Windows 2k3 currently), but perhaps RHEV-H is manageable > via libvirt?
I would expect it could be managed directly with libvirt. John _______________________________________________ rhelv5-list mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhelv5-list
