Aurélien, I forgot to comment your questions on my last e-mail. I'm worried about that too. My main concern is that I can run Xen almost on any machine I have, but KVM will only run on that that the processor has virtualization extensions (isn't it?).
If KVM prove to be better supported that Xen I think I can consider using it, but right now it only limits my options. Cheers, Leandro. 2008/4/3, Aurélien Naldi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 11:43 PM, Leandro Pereira de Lima e Silva > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Sander, > > > > That's what I did: > > - I was trying to create a virtual machine with hardy on it (hardy on > the > > host too) using xen-create-image. > > - xen-tools isn't coming with hooks for installing hardy (I've already > > filled a bug report about that), so I tried symlinking hardy.d to edgy.d > > just like the symlinks from feisty.d and gutsy.d. > > - Runned: xen-create-image --force --fs ext3 --image-dev > > /dev/group/volume_root --memory 512 --passwd --swap-dev > > /dev/group/volume_swap --dist hardy --mirror > > http://br.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu --gateway gateway_ip_addr --ip > ip_addr > > --netmask netmask_addr --hostname hostname_addr, where > "group/volume_root", > > "group/volume_swap", "gateway_ip_addr", "ip_addr", "netmask_addr", > > "hostname_addr" are actually other things that I've changed to get some > > privacy. > > - Tried to boot, but initramfs can't find the root. > > - Fixed a few things on the configuration file generated by > xen-create-image > > (tried different combinations, this is how it ended): > > - Add "root = '/dev/sda2 ro'" after the memory line. > > - Fixed the disk section that just contained "',sda1,w'," inside of > it, > > at the end it became: > > disk = [ 'phy:group/volume_swap,sda1,w', > > 'phy:group/volume_root,sda2,w' ] > > - Add "xenblk" to /etc/initramfs-tools/modules and recreated the initrd > > file. (the same as the above item, what seemd to work after a few > > tentatives) > > - Runned xm create -c hostname_addr > > - Machine starts to boot and hangs at: > > * Running local boot scripts > (/etc/rc.local) [ > > OK ] > > > > - Switched to gutsy (in xen-create-image), thinking that maybe it hangs > > because of some new hook needed for hardy. > > - Got the same problem that I had with hardy. > > > Your guest probably doesn't hang, it just doesn't show the login > prompt. You will get one by adding the following to your > /etx/xen/guest-name.cfg: > > extra = "console=tty" > > > Incidently, I have been playing just yesterday with xen in hardy and > encountered the same problems. > The next one for me is that the guest can't connect to the net, even > if an eth0 shows up. The problem seems to be related to the new kernel > in hardy as the very same host using gutsy kernel works just fine. > > More info on https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/xen-3.2/+bug/204010 > > I would like to take the occasion to ask about the future of xen in > ubuntu. A while ago a switch to kvm was announced. I would like to > know if xen will still be supported or if it will be deprecated at > some point. > The nice thing with kvm is its simplicity when running unmodified > guests, but it is much slower than xen when running "xen-enabled" > guests. Xen has a number of other advantages: > - the xen-create-image scripts make building new guests with xen much > easier and faster than with kvm! > - xen can use real devices easilly, I'm not even sure that kvm can (it > requires full disk image, doesn't it ?) > > as a result, xen is so much easier to use and efficient for my use > case (always running a few systems, without graphical interface). > > I see few options for xen in hardy > * fully supported, which requires to fix the bugs discussed in this > thread (missing hardy hooks, missing xenblk in initramfs/kernel and > broken xennet in the latest kernel) > * supported, which requires a bit less work (i.e. reverting to gutsy > kernel to fix the xennet bug) > * deprecated, which would be a bad regression if kvm doesn't get a LOT > of attention (which is probably not doable in time) > > is the plan one of these options or an alternate one ? And then what > is the plan in the long run ? The fedora guys seem to be working > toward integrating as much of the huge and dirty xen patch in the > vanilla kernel. If they succed the state of xen in every distrtib > would be greatly improved IMHO. Is canonical able/willing to help this > effort ? > > Sorry for the long worries/ranting, I hope it doesn't feel harsh for > the people working on xen in ubuntu as it really doesn't intend to: > thanks for your work so far, I just would like to get more hints about > the future and didn't find any recent "official" discussion about > this. > > Regards. > > -- > Aurélien Naldi > > -- > > ubuntu-server mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server > More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam -- Leandro Pereira de Lima e Silva
-- ubuntu-server mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
