Re: [Xen-devel] Opinions on removing the old, legacy libvirt Xen driver
On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 02:25:18PM -0700, Jim Fehlig wrote: > Hi All, > > I briefly mentioned this at an evening event during the KVM Forum / Xen Dev > Summit, but the list is certainly a better place to discuss such a topic. > What do folks think about finally removing the old, legacy, xend-based > driver from the libvirt sources? > > The Xen community made xl/libxl the primary toolstack in Xen 4.1. In Xen > 4.2, it was made the default toolstack. In Xen 4.5, xm/xend was completely > removed from the Xen source tree. According to the Xen release support > matrix [0], upstream maintenance of Xen 4.1-4.3 has been dropped for some > time, including "long term" security support. Xen 4.4-4.5 no longer receive > regular maintenance support, with security support ending in March for 4.4 > and January 2018 for 4.5. In short, the fully maintained upstream Xen > releases don't even contain xm/xend :-). > > As for downstreams, I doubt anyone is interested in running the last several > libvirt releases on an old Xen installition with xm/xend, let alone > libvirt.git master. SUSE, which still supports Xen, has no interest in using > a new libvirt on older (but still supported) SLES that uses the xm/xend > toolstack. I struggle to find a good reason to keep any of the old cruft > under src/xen/. I do think we should keep the xm/sexpr config > parsing/formatting code src/xenconfig/ since it is useful for converting old > xm and sexpr config to libvirt domXML. > > Thanks for opinions and comments! FWIW I agree with your analysis. Wei. > > Regards, > Jim > > [0] https://wiki.xenproject.org/wiki/Xen_Project_Release_Features > > ___ > Xen-devel mailing list > Xen-devel@lists.xen.org > https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel ___ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
Re: [Xen-devel] Opinions on removing the old, legacy libvirt Xen driver
On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 02:25:18PM -0700, Jim Fehlig wrote: > Hi All, > > I briefly mentioned this at an evening event during the KVM Forum / Xen Dev > Summit, but the list is certainly a better place to discuss such a topic. > What do folks think about finally removing the old, legacy, xend-based > driver from the libvirt sources? RIP. It will make your life easier! All the code that Joao and Bob are doing is against libxl and I presume other folks are more interested in that. > > The Xen community made xl/libxl the primary toolstack in Xen 4.1. In Xen > 4.2, it was made the default toolstack. In Xen 4.5, xm/xend was completely > removed from the Xen source tree. According to the Xen release support > matrix [0], upstream maintenance of Xen 4.1-4.3 has been dropped for some > time, including "long term" security support. Xen 4.4-4.5 no longer receive > regular maintenance support, with security support ending in March for 4.4 > and January 2018 for 4.5. In short, the fully maintained upstream Xen > releases don't even contain xm/xend :-). > > As for downstreams, I doubt anyone is interested in running the last several > libvirt releases on an old Xen installition with xm/xend, let alone > libvirt.git master. SUSE, which still supports Xen, has no interest in using > a new libvirt on older (but still supported) SLES that uses the xm/xend > toolstack. I struggle to find a good reason to keep any of the old cruft > under src/xen/. I do think we should keep the xm/sexpr config > parsing/formatting code src/xenconfig/ since it is useful for converting old > xm and sexpr config to libvirt domXML. /me nods. > > Thanks for opinions and comments! > > Regards, > Jim > > [0] https://wiki.xenproject.org/wiki/Xen_Project_Release_Features > > ___ > Xen-devel mailing list > Xen-devel@lists.xen.org > https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel ___ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
Re: [Xen-devel] Opinions on removing the old, legacy libvirt Xen driver
On Fri, 2016-11-18 at 14:25 -0700, Jim Fehlig wrote: > Hi All, > > I briefly mentioned this at an evening event during the KVM Forum / > Xen Dev > Summit, but the list is certainly a better place to discuss such a > topic. What > do folks think about finally removing the old, legacy, xend-based > driver from > the libvirt sources? > As little as it is worth, I'd like to send my +1 to this. > As for downstreams, I doubt anyone is interested in running the last > several > libvirt releases on an old Xen installition with xm/xend, let alone > libvirt.git > master. SUSE, which still supports Xen, has no interest in using a > new libvirt > on older (but still supported) SLES that uses the xm/xend toolstack. > I struggle > to find a good reason to keep any of the old cruft under src/xen/. I > do think we > should keep the xm/sexpr config parsing/formatting code > src/xenconfig/ since it > is useful for converting old xm and sexpr config to libvirt domXML. > I totally agree with this analysis of yours. And allow me to add that, for example, on Fedora 24, I have xen-4.6.4, which does not have xm/xend. And yet it appear I can install libvirt-daemon-driver-xen-1.3.3.2-1.fc24.x86_64 which would be totally useless and, from a user perspective, very confusing. So, again, +1. Regards, Dario -- <> (Raistlin Majere) - Dario Faggioli, Ph.D, http://about.me/dario.faggioli Senior Software Engineer, Citrix Systems R Ltd., Cambridge (UK) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
[Xen-devel] Opinions on removing the old, legacy libvirt Xen driver
Hi All, I briefly mentioned this at an evening event during the KVM Forum / Xen Dev Summit, but the list is certainly a better place to discuss such a topic. What do folks think about finally removing the old, legacy, xend-based driver from the libvirt sources? The Xen community made xl/libxl the primary toolstack in Xen 4.1. In Xen 4.2, it was made the default toolstack. In Xen 4.5, xm/xend was completely removed from the Xen source tree. According to the Xen release support matrix [0], upstream maintenance of Xen 4.1-4.3 has been dropped for some time, including "long term" security support. Xen 4.4-4.5 no longer receive regular maintenance support, with security support ending in March for 4.4 and January 2018 for 4.5. In short, the fully maintained upstream Xen releases don't even contain xm/xend :-). As for downstreams, I doubt anyone is interested in running the last several libvirt releases on an old Xen installition with xm/xend, let alone libvirt.git master. SUSE, which still supports Xen, has no interest in using a new libvirt on older (but still supported) SLES that uses the xm/xend toolstack. I struggle to find a good reason to keep any of the old cruft under src/xen/. I do think we should keep the xm/sexpr config parsing/formatting code src/xenconfig/ since it is useful for converting old xm and sexpr config to libvirt domXML. Thanks for opinions and comments! Regards, Jim [0] https://wiki.xenproject.org/wiki/Xen_Project_Release_Features ___ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
