RE: x2d2

RE: x2d2

[Ian Pratt]

> The daemon we wrote does the pty stuff in user space.  It's 
> particularly
> useful in unix becase pty's can be connected to all sorts of 
> interesting
> things like remote Xterms and ssh sessions.

OK, if it's user space, I'm sold, providing that there's also the option
to export via a tcp socket as we currently do.

Ian


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IntelliVIEW -- Interactive Reporting
Tool for open source databases. Create drag-&-drop reports. Save time
by over 75%! Publish reports on the web. Export to DOC, XLS, RTF, etc.
Download a FREE copy at http://www.intelliview.com/go/osdn_nl

Re: x2d2

[Derrik Pates]

Ian Pratt wrote:
> OK, if it's user space, I'm sold, providing that there's also the option
> to export via a tcp socket as we currently do.

Is there any possibility of exporting the console sockets as UNIX domain 
sockets instead of as INET sockets? I'd really rather not have those 
exposed to the world. I can do firewalling to control access to them, 
but it'd be nice to be able to easily leverage UNIX permissions and 
POSIX ACLs to control access, rather than having to do iptables gymnastics.

-- 
Derrik Pates
demon@devrandom.net


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IntelliVIEW -- Interactive Reporting
Tool for open source databases. Create drag-&-drop reports. Save time
by over 75%! Publish reports on the web. Export to DOC, XLS, RTF, etc.
Download a FREE copy at http://www.intelliview.com/go/osdn_nl

Re: x2d2

[Ronald G. Minnich]

On Wed, 19 Jan 2005, Derrik Pates wrote:

> Is there any possibility of exporting the console sockets as UNIX domain
> sockets instead of as INET sockets? I'd really rather not have those
> exposed to the world. I can do firewalling to control access to them,
> but it'd be nice to be able to easily leverage UNIX permissions and
> POSIX ACLs to control access, rather than having to do iptables
> gymnastics.

Both options are nice. I would find INET sockets might handy for cluster 
console.

ron


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IntelliVIEW -- Interactive Reporting
Tool for open source databases. Create drag-&-drop reports. Save time
by over 75%! Publish reports on the web. Export to DOC, XLS, RTF, etc.
Download a FREE copy at http://www.intelliview.com/go/osdn_nl

RE: x2d2

[Ian Pratt]

> Having a wiki will be extremely useful but until then do 
> people want to
> post feature requests here?  I know some things I'd like to see:

We'll hopefully have the wiki up fairly soon, but the list is a good
place for discusion.
 
> 1) domain management delegation (allow user `x' to 
> administrator domain
> id y)

I'd prefer not to tie domain administration privilege to the concept of
unix uid's, but have some higher level concept of
identification/authorization the tools know about. 

> 2) control interface multiplexing (xsc does this)
> 
> 3) intelligent dom0 rebooting (autostart domains like Xend does)

We've been thinking on terms of having a 'persistent' flag on domains to
inidicate that they should always be running, and hence started on boot.

> 4) domain consoles interfaced through pseudo-terminals

I'm not sure of the advantage of this, as its frequent you want to
export them over a network, either via tcp, or ssl.

Thanks,
Ian


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IntelliVIEW -- Interactive Reporting
Tool for open source databases. Create drag-&-drop reports. Save time
by over 75%! Publish reports on the web. Export to DOC, XLS, RTF, etc.
Download a FREE copy at http://www.intelliview.com/go/osdn_nl

RE: x2d2

[Ronald G. Minnich]

On Wed, 19 Jan 2005, Ian Pratt wrote:

> > 1) domain management delegation (allow user `x' to 
> > administrator domain
> > id y)
> 
> I'd prefer not to tie domain administration privilege to the concept of
> unix uid's, but have some higher level concept of
> identification/authorization the tools know about. 

yep, since plan 9 has no uids ...

> I'm not sure of the advantage of this, as its frequent you want to
> export them over a network, either via tcp, or ssl.

agree ...

ron


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IntelliVIEW -- Interactive Reporting
Tool for open source databases. Create drag-&-drop reports. Save time
by over 75%! Publish reports on the web. Export to DOC, XLS, RTF, etc.
Download a FREE copy at http://www.intelliview.com/go/osdn_nl

RE: x2d2

[Anthony Liguori]

On Wed, 2005-01-19 at 14:37, Ian Pratt wrote:
> I'd prefer not to tie domain administration privilege to the concept of
> unix uid's, but have some higher level concept of
> identification/authorization the tools know about. 

Yeah, I understand this desire.  The unix security model is not very
sophisticated.

However, it's awfully convenient to use user-based security. 
Particularly in dealing with networks.  If security can be based on unix
users then with pam, you automatically have security solutions that work
in a kerberos, ldap, or even windows network environment.

It doesn't have to be the only way or even the preferred way.

> > 2) control interface multiplexing (xsc does this)
> > 
> > 3) intelligent dom0 rebooting (autostart domains like Xend does)
> 
> We've been thinking on terms of having a 'persistent' flag on domains to
> inidicate that they should always be running, and hence started on boot.

A domain information database would be useful.  It would be nice for it
to be accessible via many applications though.  Otherwise, you have the
problem you have in Xend right now where the domain 'names' are not
visible to other applications that can still see the domain.

> > 4) domain consoles interfaced through pseudo-terminals
> 
> I'm not sure of the advantage of this, as its frequent you want to
> export them over a network, either via tcp, or ssl.

You're right.  It's not a make-or-break feature.  But it is still useful
for some scenarios.

Thanks,

> Thanks,
> Ian
-- 
Anthony Liguori
Linux Technology Center (LTC) - IBM Austin
E-mail: aliguori@us.ibm.com
Phone: (512) 838-1208




-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IntelliVIEW -- Interactive Reporting
Tool for open source databases. Create drag-&-drop reports. Save time
by over 75%! Publish reports on the web. Export to DOC, XLS, RTF, etc.
Download a FREE copy at http://www.intelliview.com/go/osdn_nl

Re: x2d2

[Anthony Liguori]

---- Original message ----
>From: Ian Pratt <Ian.Pratt@cl.cam.ac.uk>  
>
>We thought about the pty approach, but resisted it because we
>thought that in most setups there'd need to be a daemon running
>in user-space to export the console (typically over the network),
>and hence it wasn't worth the effort of turning it into a pty in
>the kernel. 

The daemon we wrote does the pty stuff in user space.  It's particularly
useful in unix becase pty's can be connected to all sorts of interesting
things like remote Xterms and ssh sessions.

One particularly useful feature of pty's is delegation.  Since you can
set pty's with standard unix file permissions (maybe even posix acls?)
you can delegate console access in a pretty sophisticated way.

You cannot easily do that with normal sockets.

>The current approach also minimizes the amount of OS-specific Xen
>privileged interface code, which keeps the people interested in
>using OSes other than Linux in domain 0 happy.

I agree here.  pts's are part of Posix though.  Of course more esoteric
OSes that don't have Posix support will need another mechanism but
they'll probably need a lot of work anyway to be used in dom0.

>I could be persuaded, though...

That's always a good sign :-)

Regards,

>Ian


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IntelliVIEW -- Interactive Reporting
Tool for open source databases. Create drag-&-drop reports. Save time
by over 75%! Publish reports on the web. Export to DOC, XLS, RTF, etc.
Download a FREE copy at http://www.intelliview.com/go/osdn_nl

x2d2

[Jacob Gorm Hansen]

hi,

is x2d2 (the minimal xend replacement in C if I understand correctly) 
still alive? I do not have bk at the moment, but grepping on x2d2 in the 
Changelog file only has a comment back from November. I can make it 
compile by removing -Werror from the Makefile, but is anyone using it 
and working on it, or is it a dead end?

Jacob


-------------------------------------------------------
The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues
Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek.
It's fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt

Re: x2d2

[Ronald G. Minnich]

On Tue, 18 Jan 2005, Jacob Gorm Hansen wrote:

> is x2d2 (the minimal xend replacement in C if I understand correctly)
> still alive? I do not have bk at the moment, but grepping on x2d2 in the
> Changelog file only has a comment back from November. I can make it
> compile by removing -Werror from the Makefile, but is anyone using it
> and working on it, or is it a dead end?

I need it for bproc machines, so definitely have interest in it.

ron


-------------------------------------------------------
The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues
Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek.
It's fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt

Re: x2d2

[Anthony Liguori]

Jacob Gorm Hansen wrote:

> hi,
>
> is x2d2 (the minimal xend replacement in C if I understand correctly) 
> still alive? I do not have bk at the moment, but grepping on x2d2 in 
> the Changelog file only has a comment back from November. I can make 
> it compile by removing -Werror from the Makefile, but is anyone using 
> it and working on it, or is it a dead end?

I don't think so.  It shouldn't actually work anymore.  It doesn't do 
proper notifications on event channels.  There's also a bug in the way 
ports are allocated.

Is there still interest in x2d2 (or any C-based minimal xend)?  I think 
I could fix x2d2 pretty easily.

Regards,

> Jacob
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues
> Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek.
> It's fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xen-devel
>
-- 
Anthony Liguori
anthony@codemonkey.ws



-------------------------------------------------------
The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues
Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek.
It's fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt

Re: x2d2

[Jacob Gorm Hansen]

Anthony Liguori wrote:
> Jacob Gorm Hansen wrote:
> 
>> hi,
>>
>> is x2d2 (the minimal xend replacement in C if I understand correctly) 
>> still alive? I do not have bk at the moment, but grepping on x2d2 in 
>> the Changelog file only has a comment back from November. I can make 
>> it compile by removing -Werror from the Makefile, but is anyone using 
>> it and working on it, or is it a dead end?
> 
> 
> I don't think so.  It shouldn't actually work anymore.  It doesn't do 
> proper notifications on event channels.  There's also a bug in the way 
> ports are allocated.
> 
> Is there still interest in x2d2 (or any C-based minimal xend)?  I think 
> I could fix x2d2 pretty easily.
> 

Yes, lots of interest from me, the python xend effectively keeps me from 
running Xen 2.0, so I am still stuck with 1.3. The stock xend uses too 
much memory, provides too much functionality, and depends on too many 
third-party packages -- not the ideal specs for the minimal trusted 
computing base I am trying to develop :-(

Jacob


-------------------------------------------------------
The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues
Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek.
It's fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt

Re: x2d2

[Andrew Warfield]

We are in the process of some fairly major revisions to the control
tools.  I think that the general expectation is that 3.0 will show
some pretty big changes to the control interfaces and tools.  The
unstable tree now has a control switch (xcs) which sits under xend and
allows other applications to be written to use the control channels
without needing to modify xend.  We are hoping to move towards small,
single-purpose management tools in dom0.

This should all start to appear in the unstable tree over the next
couple of months.

a.

On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 01:58:46 -0800, Jacob Gorm Hansen <jacobg@diku.dk> wrote:
> Anthony Liguori wrote:
> > Jacob Gorm Hansen wrote:
> >
> >> hi,
> >>
> >> is x2d2 (the minimal xend replacement in C if I understand correctly)
> >> still alive? I do not have bk at the moment, but grepping on x2d2 in
> >> the Changelog file only has a comment back from November. I can make
> >> it compile by removing -Werror from the Makefile, but is anyone using
> >> it and working on it, or is it a dead end?
> >
> >
> > I don't think so.  It shouldn't actually work anymore.  It doesn't do
> > proper notifications on event channels.  There's also a bug in the way
> > ports are allocated.
> >
> > Is there still interest in x2d2 (or any C-based minimal xend)?  I think
> > I could fix x2d2 pretty easily.
> >
> 
> Yes, lots of interest from me, the python xend effectively keeps me from
> running Xen 2.0, so I am still stuck with 1.3. The stock xend uses too
> much memory, provides too much functionality, and depends on too many
> third-party packages -- not the ideal specs for the minimal trusted
> computing base I am trying to develop :-(
> 
> Jacob
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues
> Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek.
> It's fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xen-devel
>


-------------------------------------------------------
The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues
Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek.
It's fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt

Re: x2d2

[Anthony Liguori]

Andrew Warfield wrote:

>We are in the process of some fairly major revisions to the control
>tools.  I think that the general expectation is that 3.0 will show
>some pretty big changes to the control interfaces and tools.  The
>unstable tree now has a control switch (xcs) which sits under xend and
>  
>
Wow.  I wrote the same exact thing about a week or two ago.

I took a slightly different approach though.  I opened a unix domain 
socket to receive messages on and also opened up ptys for each domain.

The daemon takes care of multiplexing and demultiplexing the messages so 
if your app sends a message, it will only get that response.

What are your thoughts on this approach?  I particularly like the idea 
of piping the console data to a pty.

Regards,

>allows other applications to be written to use the control channels
>without needing to modify xend.  We are hoping to move towards small,
>single-purpose management tools in dom0.
>
>This should all start to appear in the unstable tree over the next
>couple of months.
>
>  
>

-- 
Anthony Liguori
anthony@codemonkey.ws



-------------------------------------------------------
The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues
Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek.
It's fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt

Re: x2d2

[Ian Pratt]

> Andrew Warfield wrote:
> 
> >We are in the process of some fairly major revisions to the control
> >tools.  I think that the general expectation is that 3.0 will show
> >some pretty big changes to the control interfaces and tools.  The
> >unstable tree now has a control switch (xcs) which sits under xend and
> >  
> >
> Wow.  I wrote the same exact thing about a week or two ago.
> 
> I took a slightly different approach though.  I opened a unix domain 
> socket to receive messages on and also opened up ptys for each domain.
> 
> The daemon takes care of multiplexing and demultiplexing the messages so 
> if your app sends a message, it will only get that response.
> 
> What are your thoughts on this approach?  I particularly like the idea 
> of piping the console data to a pty.

We thought about the pty approach, but resisted it because we
thought that in most setups there'd need to be a daemon running
in user-space to export the console (typically over the network),
and hence it wasn't worth the effort of turning it into a pty in
the kernel. 

The current approach also minimizes the amount of OS-specific Xen
privileged interface code, which keeps the people interested in
using OSes other than Linux in domain 0 happy.

I could be persuaded, though...

Ian


-------------------------------------------------------
The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues
Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek.
It's fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt

Re: x2d2

[Andrew Warfield]

Another option is to give the console drivers their own device channel
(i.e. take them off the control rings) and then just provide a
separate backend for them.  From there dom0 could export them however
it wanted to without depending on the other control tools at all.

a.

On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 16:36:45 +0000, Ian Pratt <Ian.Pratt@cl.cam.ac.uk> wrote:
> > Andrew Warfield wrote:
> >
> > >We are in the process of some fairly major revisions to the control
> > >tools.  I think that the general expectation is that 3.0 will show
> > >some pretty big changes to the control interfaces and tools.  The
> > >unstable tree now has a control switch (xcs) which sits under xend and
> > >
> > >
> > Wow.  I wrote the same exact thing about a week or two ago.
> >
> > I took a slightly different approach though.  I opened a unix domain
> > socket to receive messages on and also opened up ptys for each domain.
> >
> > The daemon takes care of multiplexing and demultiplexing the messages so
> > if your app sends a message, it will only get that response.
> >
> > What are your thoughts on this approach?  I particularly like the idea
> > of piping the console data to a pty.
> 
> We thought about the pty approach, but resisted it because we
> thought that in most setups there'd need to be a daemon running
> in user-space to export the console (typically over the network),
> and hence it wasn't worth the effort of turning it into a pty in
> the kernel.
> 
> The current approach also minimizes the amount of OS-specific Xen
> privileged interface code, which keeps the people interested in
> using OSes other than Linux in domain 0 happy.
> 
> I could be persuaded, though...
> 
> Ian
>


-------------------------------------------------------
The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues
Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek.
It's fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt

Re: x2d2

[Ronald G. Minnich]

On Wed, 19 Jan 2005, Ian Pratt wrote:

> The current approach also minimizes the amount of OS-specific Xen
> privileged interface code, which keeps the people interested in using
> OSes other than Linux in domain 0 happy.

this is a good goal.

ron


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IntelliVIEW -- Interactive Reporting
Tool for open source databases. Create drag-&-drop reports. Save time
by over 75%! Publish reports on the web. Export to DOC, XLS, RTF, etc.
Download a FREE copy at http://www.intelliview.com/go/osdn_nl

Re: x2d2

[Michael Hohnbaum]

On Wed, 2005-01-19 at 10:12 +0000, Andrew Warfield wrote:
> We are in the process of some fairly major revisions to the control
> tools.  I think that the general expectation is that 3.0 will show
> some pretty big changes to the control interfaces and tools.  The
> unstable tree now has a control switch (xcs) which sits under xend and
> allows other applications to be written to use the control channels
> without needing to modify xend.  We are hoping to move towards small,
> single-purpose management tools in dom0.
> 
> This should all start to appear in the unstable tree over the next
> couple of months.
> 
> a.
> 
Do you have plans you can share regarding these revisions to the control
tools?  I am exploring needs within my organization for management tools
on Xen.  Besides being interested in what you have planned, I can 
contribute assistance - development, testing, etc.

Thanks.

              Michael

> On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 01:58:46 -0800, Jacob Gorm Hansen <jacobg@diku.dk> wrote:
> > Anthony Liguori wrote:
> > > Jacob Gorm Hansen wrote:
> > >
> > >> hi,
> > >>
> > >> is x2d2 (the minimal xend replacement in C if I understand correctly)
> > >> still alive? I do not have bk at the moment, but grepping on x2d2 in
> > >> the Changelog file only has a comment back from November. I can make
> > >> it compile by removing -Werror from the Makefile, but is anyone using
> > >> it and working on it, or is it a dead end?
> > >
> > >
> > > I don't think so.  It shouldn't actually work anymore.  It doesn't do
> > > proper notifications on event channels.  There's also a bug in the way
> > > ports are allocated.
> > >
> > > Is there still interest in x2d2 (or any C-based minimal xend)?  I think
> > > I could fix x2d2 pretty easily.
> > >
> > 
> > Yes, lots of interest from me, the python xend effectively keeps me from
> > running Xen 2.0, so I am still stuck with 1.3. The stock xend uses too
> > much memory, provides too much functionality, and depends on too many
> > third-party packages -- not the ideal specs for the minimal trusted
> > computing base I am trying to develop :-(
> > 
> > Jacob
> > 

> 
-- 
Michael Hohnbaum                             503 578 5486
hohnbaum@us.ibm.com                          t/l 775 5486



-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IntelliVIEW -- Interactive Reporting
Tool for open source databases. Create drag-&-drop reports. Save time
by over 75%! Publish reports on the web. Export to DOC, XLS, RTF, etc.
Download a FREE copy at http://www.intelliview.com/go/osdn_nl

Re: x2d2

[Andrew Warfield]

> Do you have plans you can share regarding these revisions to the control
> tools?  I am exploring needs within my organization for management tools
> on Xen.  Besides being interested in what you have planned, I can
> contribute assistance - development, testing, etc.

Yes -- we have had a fair bit of discussion about this stuff over the
past couple of months and there is even a bit of planning documention
around somewhere.  It's the middle of the night in Cambridge though --
I'll chat with people here tomorrow and aim to get some details posted
either then or over the weekend.

cheers,
a.


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IntelliVIEW -- Interactive Reporting
Tool for open source databases. Create drag-&-drop reports. Save time
by over 75%! Publish reports on the web. Export to DOC, XLS, RTF, etc.
Download a FREE copy at http://www.intelliview.com/go/osdn_nl

Re: x2d2

[Ronald G. Minnich]

On Wed, 19 Jan 2005, Anthony Liguori wrote:

> Is there still interest in x2d2 (or any C-based minimal xend)?  I think I
> could fix x2d2 pretty easily.

we could really use it here.

ron


-------------------------------------------------------
The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues
Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek.
It's fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt

Re: x2d2

[Anthony Liguori]

Having a wiki will be extremely useful but until then do people want to
post feature requests here?  I know some things I'd like to see:

1) domain management delegation (allow user `x' to administrator domain
id y)

2) control interface multiplexing (xsc does this)

3) intelligent dom0 rebooting (autostart domains like Xend does)

4) domain consoles interfaced through pseudo-terminals

I'm very willing to help out coding the new management tools.  I want to
see what people think is useful first.

Regards,

On Wed, 2005-01-19 at 09:47, Ronald G. Minnich wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Jan 2005, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> 
> > Is there still interest in x2d2 (or any C-based minimal xend)?  I think I
> > could fix x2d2 pretty easily.
> 
> we could really use it here.
> 
> ron
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues
> Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek.
> It's fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xen-devel
-- 
Anthony Liguori
Linux Technology Center (LTC) - IBM Austin
E-mail: aliguori@us.ibm.com
Phone: (512) 838-1208




-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IntelliVIEW -- Interactive Reporting
Tool for open source databases. Create drag-&-drop reports. Save time
by over 75%! Publish reports on the web. Export to DOC, XLS, RTF, etc.
Download a FREE copy at http://www.intelliview.com/go/osdn_nl

Re: x2d2

[Ronald G. Minnich]

It's very important to us, for what we do, to get Python completely out of
the picture. Is that possible?

ron


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IntelliVIEW -- Interactive Reporting
Tool for open source databases. Create drag-&-drop reports. Save time
by over 75%! Publish reports on the web. Export to DOC, XLS, RTF, etc.
Download a FREE copy at http://www.intelliview.com/go/osdn_nl

Re: x2d2

[Rik van Riel]

On Wed, 19 Jan 2005, Ronald G. Minnich wrote:

> It's very important to us, for what we do, to get Python completely out 
> of the picture. Is that possible?

I would also like to ship a smaller Xen daemon to the
Fedora users, since I expect that quite a few of the
first wave of Xen users will be students with more time
than hardware - and they will care about having a small
Xen daemon.

-- 
"Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are,
by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IntelliVIEW -- Interactive Reporting
Tool for open source databases. Create drag-&-drop reports. Save time
by over 75%! Publish reports on the web. Export to DOC, XLS, RTF, etc.
Download a FREE copy at http://www.intelliview.com/go/osdn_nl

Re: x2d2

[Rik van Riel]

On Wed, 19 Jan 2005, Anthony Liguori wrote:

> 4) domain consoles interfaced through pseudo-terminals

   5) add new devices to a running virtual machine

   6) have an API that can be used by higher level management
      software, so people can script the deployment of virtual
      machines, in a similar way to how they script the
      deployment of physical systems today.  Eg. the installer
      could use this API to create and configure a virtual
      system, when the user wants to install an additional
      virtual machine.

   7) is light weight, ie. can run with very little memory
      overhead, so little memory is spent on domain 0 and
      more memory is left over for eg. the testing of rawhide ;)

> I'm very willing to help out coding the new management tools.  I want to
> see what people think is useful first.

I'd be willing to ship experimental management tools in Fedora,
so there is a userbase to test the software.

-- 
"Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are,
by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IntelliVIEW -- Interactive Reporting
Tool for open source databases. Create drag-&-drop reports. Save time
by over 75%! Publish reports on the web. Export to DOC, XLS, RTF, etc.
Download a FREE copy at http://www.intelliview.com/go/osdn_nl

Re: x2d2

[Felipe Alfaro Solana]

On 20 Jan 2005, at 19:36, Rik van Riel wrote:

> On Wed, 19 Jan 2005, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>
>> 4) domain consoles interfaced through pseudo-terminals
>
>   5) add new devices to a running virtual machine
>
>   6) have an API that can be used by higher level management
>      software, so people can script the deployment of virtual
>      machines, in a similar way to how they script the
>      deployment of physical systems today.  Eg. the installer
>      could use this API to create and configure a virtual
>      system, when the user wants to install an additional
>      virtual machine.
>
>   7) is light weight, ie. can run with very little memory
>      overhead, so little memory is spent on domain 0 and
>      more memory is left over for eg. the testing of rawhide ;)
>
>> I'm very willing to help out coding the new management tools.  I want 
>> to
>> see what people think is useful first.
>
> I'd be willing to ship experimental management tools in Fedora,
> so there is a userbase to test the software.

I'm interested on anything related to Xen :-)



-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IntelliVIEW -- Interactive Reporting
Tool for open source databases. Create drag-&-drop reports. Save time
by over 75%! Publish reports on the web. Export to DOC, XLS, RTF, etc.
Download a FREE copy at http://www.intelliview.com/go/osdn_nl

Re: x2d2

[Adam Sulmicki]

On Wed, 19 Jan 2005, Anthony Liguori wrote:

> I don't think so.  It shouldn't actually work anymore.  It doesn't do proper 
> notifications on event channels.  There's also a bug in the way ports are 
> allocated.
>
> Is there still interest in x2d2 (or any C-based minimal xend)?  I think I 
> could fix x2d2 pretty easily.

definitely.



-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IntelliVIEW -- Interactive Reporting
Tool for open source databases. Create drag-&-drop reports. Save time
by over 75%! Publish reports on the web. Export to DOC, XLS, RTF, etc.
Download a FREE copy at http://www.intelliview.com/go/osdn_nl

Re: x2d2

[Grzegorz Milos]

> hi,
>
> is x2d2 (the minimal xend replacement in C if I understand correctly)
> still alive? I do not have bk at the moment, but grepping on x2d2 in the
> Changelog file only has a comment back from November. I can make it
> compile by removing -Werror from the Makefile, but is anyone using it
> and working on it, or is it a dead end?
>
> Jacob

I used it quite recently. It seemed to work with two little modifications:
a) removing -Werror (you got as far as that)
b) when creating event channels (there are 2 places in x2d2 that do that) you 
need to initialise the port numbers to 0 (0 means first available).

Cheers
Gregor

-- 
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur --- Anon


-------------------------------------------------------
The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues
Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek.
It's fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt