On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 01:52:34AM +0100, joy wrote:
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 01:05:53PM +0100, joy wrote:
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/jeremy/xen.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/xen/stable
It's great to see the new packages :) I didn't want to rain on the parade by
instantly filing
Hello!
On Wed, 24 Feb 2010 22:07:42 +, Ian Campbell wrote:
On Wed, 2010-02-24 at 18:29 +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 03:42:32PM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
http://hermes.jura.uni-tuebingen.de/~blank/debian/xen-test/
It seems to run.
I get a panic very
On Wed, 2010-03-17 at 16:34 +0100, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
Hello!
On Wed, 24 Feb 2010 22:07:42 +, Ian Campbell wrote:
On Wed, 2010-02-24 at 18:29 +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 03:42:32PM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 01:05:53PM +0100, joy wrote:
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/jeremy/xen.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/xen/stable
It's great to see the new packages :) I didn't want to rain on the parade by
instantly filing bug reports, but I must point out a bit of a problem with
Hi,
Just in case I'm the first to notice, we now have:
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/jeremy/xen.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/xen/stable
This is the new upstream default branch, with paravirt_ops dom0, and based
on 2.6.32-stable, so it's presumably suitable for inclusion as a new patch
On Wed, 2010-02-24 at 13:05 +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
Hi,
Just in case I'm the first to notice, we now have:
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/jeremy/xen.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/xen/stable
This is the new upstream default branch, with paravirt_ops dom0, and based
on
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 01:02:28PM +, Ian Campbell wrote:
On Wed, 2010-02-24 at 13:05 +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
This is the new upstream default branch, with paravirt_ops dom0, and based
on 2.6.32-stable, so it's presumably suitable for inclusion as a new patch
that would restore our
On Wed, 2010-02-24 at 14:39 +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 01:02:28PM +, Ian Campbell wrote:
On Wed, 2010-02-24 at 13:05 +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
This is the new upstream default branch, with paravirt_ops dom0, and based
on 2.6.32-stable, so it's presumably
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 01:53:09PM +, Ian Campbell wrote:
On Wed, 2010-02-24 at 14:39 +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
Already on it. It seems to need a hypervisor update as well.
I believe this branch needs either Xen 4.0 or 3.4 with a patch
backported for the new dom0 APIC interfaces, I
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 03:42:32PM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
http://hermes.jura.uni-tuebingen.de/~blank/debian/xen-test/
It seems to run. But for a working xend, it needs a further update.
755fea06af4bab521a01062a7efaedfe99c36075 libxen-dev_3.4.3~rc2-1_amd64.deb
On Wed, 2010-02-24 at 15:42 +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 01:53:09PM +, Ian Campbell wrote:
On Wed, 2010-02-24 at 14:39 +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
Already on it. It seems to need a hypervisor update as well.
I believe this branch needs either Xen 4.0 or 3.4 with
On Wed, 2010-02-24 at 18:29 +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 03:42:32PM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
http://hermes.jura.uni-tuebingen.de/~blank/debian/xen-test/
It seems to run.
I get a panic very early on No available IRQ to bind to: increase
nr_irqs!. Will investigate
12 matches
Mail list logo
