On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 12:09:56PM -0800, Neobiker wrote:
>
>
> Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> >
> >
> >> Xen may be back to stay as a virtualisation standard if kernel 2.6.38
> >> will
> >> be able to start as dom0 (as 2.6.37 will) and to be able to drive domUs
> >> (missing in upcoming 2.6.37). I think that's really really (!) important
> >> for
> >> XEN future. And: XEN 4.0.x must be as rock stable as 3.4.2 as soon as
> >> possible... i personnally don't think about using 4.0.x for production
> >> systems at this point...
> >
> > Uh, even 4.0.1? What are the issues you are worried about?
> >
> >
> I'm worried about stability, changes in behaviour, changes in kernel /
> parameters, problems with compiling some orig xen kernel, problems running
All of those, except stability, are issues you are going to encounter with
a new kernel...
Can you be more specific about the stability? Have you seen it crash?
> 2.6.18 kernel like above, dependencies like pvops version .32 for > 4.0.1,
> .31 for < 4.0.1, bugs in 4.0.0, less bugs in 4.0.1, missing features like
PVUSB.. well we would love if somebody volunteered to do the driver.
> pvusb, windows in vhd didn't like the GPLPV drivers (blue screen), signed
Uhh, no idea. I am actually using the Novell GPL drivers in Windows 2000
and they seem to work fine.
> Citrix PV drivers only work with version 5.5, not 5.6, pvops kernel works on
> my hardware with debian pvops xen 4.0.1 kernel, but xen pvops kernel
> compiled according to wiki fc13 page has errors with agpart loading and so
> on..... so i'm waiting for 4.0.3 ;-)
Hm, the agpart loading I thought was fixed. When did you observe this behavior?
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
Home