[CentOS-devel] Preview Xen 3.2 rc* packages

Thu Jan 10 19:01:02 UTC 2008
Ross S. W. Walker <rwalker at medallion.com>

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



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.