On 01/17/12 14:49, Carsten Heesch wrote:
>> What gave you that idea? The patches in that directory are the differences
>> between the 9.0-RELEASE source tree and the one I used to build the AMI.
>
> Oh, must have been wishful thinking then that it might go into FreeBSD and
> not remain a bunch o
Dear Sean,
I've applied the patches to 8.2/releng, but as I am not an xen/i386
expert, some patches may got applied wrong. Although the kernel did
compile, it did not boot, just crashed.
regards,
Kojedzinszky Richard
Euronet Magyarorszag Informatikai Zrt.
On Mon, 16 Jan 2012, Sean Bruno wr
> What gave you that idea? The patches in that directory are the differences
> between the 9.0-RELEASE source tree and the one I used to build the AMI.
Oh, must have been wishful thinking then that it might go into FreeBSD and not
remain a bunch of separate patches... :)
>> The csup'ed source
On 01/17/12 13:06, Carsten Heesch wrote:
> There's a folder ec2-bits in the root directory, which contains a bunch of
> patches. From your blog post I gather that they will not (much longer) be
> required if one was to build their own kernel?
What gave you that idea? The patches in that directo
>
> Details at
> http://www.daemonology.net/blog/2012-01-16-FreeBSD-now-on-all-EC2-instance-types.html
That's fantastic news! Really great stuff, Colin, especially the support for
m1.small instances!
Just two questions if I may, with regards to the m1.small AMI in particular:-
There's a fol
Hello,
I've been trying to compile a kernel for my FreeBSD9 XEN guest system using the
provided XENHVM config. I found that that configuration works fine, unless you
use a specific make.conf file.
When I used that make.conf file, booting from that kernel it spams the console
with consecutive me
