[CentOS-devel] Preview Xen 3.2 rc* packages

Ross S. W. Walker rwalker at medallion.com
Thu Jan 10 19:43:53 UTC 2008

Ross S. W. Walker wrote:
> Ian Jackson wrote:
> > 
> > Xen 3.2 is in the final stages of preparation.  We (Xen 
> upstream) are
> > planning to provide binary packages for Centos 5.1, amongs others.
> > 
> > I've merged the patches and so on from xen-3.0.3-41.centos5.i386.rpm
> > with a recent xen-unstable RC tip (16701:8922a1469284).  
> With a bit of
> > effort I have managed to get a set of packages which appear 
> to be able
> > to work at least in my simple `does this function at all' test.
> > 
> > I'm mentioning it here so that you can have a look at what I've done
> > and comment on it.  We'll probably be making official upstream rpms
> > very soon after the Xen 3.2 release, which we hope will be 
> early next
> > week.  Please send me feedback either here on-list or privately.
> > 
> > Most of the useful patches from 3.0.3-41.centos5 have been
> > incorporated upstream so I just deleted those from my srpm.
> > 
> > There were also a few changes which I have just dropped.  In
> > particular, the RHEL5 package (and thus the Centos one too) is a
> > bizarre frankenxen containing a forward port of the 3.0 
> dom0 userland
> > tools to the Xen 3.1 hypervisor.
> > 
> > In my package I have included the hypervisor in the xen-*.rpm rather
> > than making a kernel package too.  This is more in line 
> with practice
> > upstream; dom0 kernel compatibility between the 3.1 and 3.2
> > hypervisors is good and the new hypervisor seems to work for me with
> > the Centos 5.1 2.6.18-53.el5xen kernel.
> > 
> > You can find the actual files here:
> > http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~ijackson/xen-3.2-package-pr
> > eviews/centos5.1/
> > 
> > These packages should not be used for production - they're previews
> > and I may have made elementary packaging mistakes. Xen 3.2 is still
> > unreleased and in need of more testing.
> I know I appreciate the effort you guys make to release these binaries
> for the different platforms.
> If I had only 2 wishes they would be, 1) try to make the install mimic
> the distro's Xen path layout a little better, 2) provide 
> 64-bit binaries...
> Other then those two little points I have found the binaries pretty
> stable.

Ok, I gave it a whirl, the minor paths issue I mentioned earlier seems
to be fixed here, but the 'localtime' patch needs to be backported
(or forwardported in this case) as HVM clocks still only report time
in UTC.


This e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by
the addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged
and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient
of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribution or copying of this e-mail, and any attachments thereto,
is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error,
please immediately notify the sender and permanently delete the
original and any copy or printout thereof.

More information about the CentOS-devel mailing list