Re: Re: debian

Re: Re: debian

[Brian Wolfe]

On Mon, 2004-12-13 at 14:10 +0200, Nuutti Kotivuori wrote:
> James Harper wrote:
> > I just tried building a debian xen0 kernel with the standard make-kpkg
> > tools and the packages from www.terrabox.com, and while it gave me a
> > resulting package, I noted the following:
> 
> > . resulting package name is kernel-xen0-2.6.9_1_i386.deb where I would
> > have expected kernel-image-2.6.9...
> 
> This is intentional, I believe, but I'm not sure if it is
> correct. Obviously kernel-image-2.6.9 is different from
> kernel-xen0-2.6.9 and needs to contain different scripts and be
> handled differently. But, since the kernel version is still the
> determining factor in many paths (like /lib/modules/2.6.9), the
> package would need to conflict with every other kernel by the same
> version. So, I'm really not sure what would be the best approach here.

This is why I use kver-extraver-privmode as the uname -r in
xenlinuxbuilder. You can specify extraversion in make-kpkg and avoid
this kind of conflict in most things.

> 
> > . no initrd generated on install even though I requested one on the
> > make-kpkg commandline
> 
> I would say this is a bug - the Xen postinst scripts are not those of
> normal i386 kernels I believe, so they need fixing. I have never tried
> initrd kernels with Xen.

Probably because the initrd creation scripts for i386-xen don't exist
yet. Probably just a symlink to the normal i386 in debian would do the
trick. :)

> 
> > . enabling pnp bios support caused a failed compile. Probably don't want
> > this anyway though as I understand there is no way to access pnp bios
> > info from xen.
> 
> There are things in the kernel config, which if enabled, cause the
> compilation to fail. The Xen guys probably will be fixing these as
> they crop up.

I'm hitting a few myself at compile time as I refine a +kitchen-sink
config for the debianized kernels that I haven't released yet. I'll
release info when I get back to tweaking the sets.

> 
> And I would *guess* that with Xen 2.1, accessing the PnP bios info
> from Xen should work as with a normal machine.
> 
> > Is this normal?
> 
> Well, normal - I guess.
> 
> -- Naked
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
> Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
> Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. 
> http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xen-devel
-- 



-------------------------------------------------------
SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. 
http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/

RE: Re: debian

[James Harper]

> 
> This is why I use kver-extraver-privmode as the uname -r in
> xenlinuxbuilder. You can specify extraversion in make-kpkg and avoid
> this kind of conflict in most things.
> 
> > I would say this is a bug - the Xen postinst scripts are not those
of
> > normal i386 kernels I believe, so they need fixing. I have never
tried
> > initrd kernels with Xen.
> 
> Probably because the initrd creation scripts for i386-xen don't exist
> yet. Probably just a symlink to the normal i386 in debian would do the
> trick. :)

I can test that pretty easy if you tell me how to do it.

One other thing I noticed was that a second make-kpkg produced a kernel
package with almost no modules, and a third make-kpkg had even less
modules and didn't actually do any building. I may have done something
wrong to trigger this but it also may be a bug.

Thanks

James



-------------------------------------------------------
SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/

debian

[James Harper]

Is anyone maintaining debian packages anymore?

Thanks

James

Re: debian

[Matthew Palmer]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 584 bytes --]

On Fri, Nov 11, 2005 at 03:36:27PM +1100, James Harper wrote:
> Is anyone maintaining debian packages anymore?

Adam Heath <doogie@brainfood.com> is listed as the maintainer for the
packages currently in Debian.  Admittedly, those packages are a little
behind the times (2.0.6).  Have you asked Adam whether he's still interested
in maintaining the packages (nicely, of course!)

If Adam is no longer interested, I might be convinced to step up to the
plate -- I've got the Debian Xen packages in production in a couple of
places, and naturally wouldn't like to see them rot.

- Matt

[-- Attachment #1.2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 138 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

Re: debian

[ed despard]

Im planning on updating my packages as soon is some issues with my 
google summer of code program under which I initialy developed them get 
worked out.  I have a big list of improvements and updates to push to 
the server that are just waiting.  Eventually id like to be able to 
have nightly packages. Hopefully everything will be cleared up soon and 
ill be able to continue with the work.

Edward Despard

On Nov 10, 2005, at 11:36 PM, James Harper wrote:

> Is anyone maintaining debian packages anymore?
>
> Thanks
>
> James
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
>

Re: debian

[Karsten M. Self]

on Fri, Nov 11, 2005 at 03:36:27PM +1100, James Harper (james.harper@bendigoit.com.au) wrote:
> Is anyone maintaining debian packages anymore?

Adam Heath is the listed maintainer.  Any reason you think he's not
keeping up with it?

Latest revision is 2.06, he hasn't been tracking Xen 3.x AFAIK.


Cheers.

-- 
Karsten M. Self <karsten@xensource.com>
XenSource, Inc.
2300 Geng Road #250                                +1 650.798.5900 x259
Palo Alto, CA 94303                                +1 650.493.1579 fax

Re: debian

[Tobias Hunger]

On Friday 11 November 2005 06:20, ed despard wrote:
> Im planning on updating my packages as soon is some issues with my
> google summer of code program under which I initialy developed them get
> worked out.  I have a big list of improvements and updates to push to
> the server that are just waiting.  Eventually id like to be able to
> have nightly packages. Hopefully everything will be cleared up soon and
> ill be able to continue with the work.
>
> Edward Despard

Since I have not seen much activity lately I have started rolling some debs of 
my own... They are not terribly useful yet and mostly a excuse to learn how 
to build debs:-)

I'd prefer not to enter a competition about xen debs, so can I help with yours 
instead?

Regards,
Tobias

Re: debian

[Adam Heath]

On Fri, 11 Nov 2005, James Harper wrote:

> Is anyone maintaining debian packages anymore?

I'm trying to get xen-unstable packages done.  I've got a spare machine here
now to play with, finally.

See my mails earlier about unstable not compiling(turned out to be a buggy
shell snippet in the xen makefiles when applying a patch, and debian's stupid
kernel source management).

Re: Re: debian

[Adam Heath]

On Fri, 11 Nov 2005, Matthew Palmer wrote:

> On Fri, Nov 11, 2005 at 03:36:27PM +1100, James Harper wrote:
> > Is anyone maintaining debian packages anymore?
>
> Adam Heath <doogie@brainfood.com> is listed as the maintainer for the
> packages currently in Debian.  Admittedly, those packages are a little
> behind the times (2.0.6).  Have you asked Adam whether he's still interested
> in maintaining the packages (nicely, of course!)
>
> If Adam is no longer interested, I might be convinced to step up to the
> plate -- I've got the Debian Xen packages in production in a couple of
> places, and naturally wouldn't like to see them rot.

I don't like uploading packages that I can't test.  Which obviously means
installing them and booting xen.  My work hasn't had a test system for me to
use, but that seems to be fixed now.

Another problem, is that debian like to remove old kernel source.  Which means
supporting older xen(even 2.0.7) is tricky, as it requires 2.6.12.

In all honesty, I would love to see newer versions of xen 2.0 for newer
kernels; it'd make my job that much easier.

Re: debian

[Adam Heath]

On Fri, 11 Nov 2005, Karsten M. Self wrote:

> on Fri, Nov 11, 2005 at 03:36:27PM +1100, James Harper (james.harper@bendigoit.com.au) wrote:
> > Is anyone maintaining debian packages anymore?
>
> Adam Heath is the listed maintainer.  Any reason you think he's not
> keeping up with it?
>
> Latest revision is 2.06, he hasn't been tracking Xen 3.x AFAIK.

One of the reasons why I also don't follow unstable, is xen upstream likes to
change things drastically, without providing backwards compatibility.  I got
bit by that during the 1.x -> 2.x switch.  It's left a sour taste in my mouth.

Re: Re: debian

[Alexander Charbonnet]

> I don't like uploading packages that I can't test.  Which obviously means
> installing them and booting xen.  My work hasn't had a test system for me
> to use, but that seems to be fixed now.

What I'd really like for Christmas is a Xen x86_64 package for Sarge.  Do you 
have a 64-bit system to play with?  I'd be glad to do testing for you on my 
Opteron server...

Thanks,
Alex

Re: debian

[Sami Haahtinen]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Adam Heath wrote:
> I'm trying to get xen-unstable packages done.  I've got a spare machine here
> now to play with, finally.
> 
> See my mails earlier about unstable not compiling(turned out to be a buggy
> shell snippet in the xen makefiles when applying a patch, and debian's stupid
> kernel source management).

If you need help with testing and/or maintenance on AMD64, let me know.
I'd be happy to help.

- - S
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFDdwx4qbb3MLg9dhwRAvMIAJ9BXhEeBi5bKEJ2np5QKE/de2NlJQCfX4Qq
58hGfMJoMQHSlJX5hKnpCRs=
=Zps3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----