Has 3.0.3 been released?

Has 3.0.3 been released?

[Anthony Liguori]

http://www.xensource.com/xen/downloads/index.html

The XenSource site seems to think so but I haven't seen an announcement 
here.  Is rc4 tag the same changeset for 3.0.3?

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

Re: Has 3.0.3 been released?

[S.Çağlar Onur]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 527 bytes --]

18 Eki 2006 Çar 00:06 tarihinde, Anthony Liguori şunları yazmıştı: 
> http://www.xensource.com/xen/downloads/index.html
>
> The XenSource site seems to think so but I haven't seen an announcement
> here.  Is rc4 tag the same changeset for 3.0.3?

It seems (i already downloaded and prepared a package) rc5 tag is the same 
changeset for 3.0.3.

-- 
S.Çağlar Onur <caglar@pardus.org.tr>
http://cekirdek.pardus.org.tr/~caglar/

Linux is like living in a teepee. No Windows, no Gates and an Apache in house!

[-- Attachment #1.2: 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: Has 3.0.3 been released?

[Steven Hand]

>http://www.xensource.com/xen/downloads/index.html
>
>The XenSource site seems to think so but I haven't seen an announcement 
>here.  Is rc4 tag the same changeset for 3.0.3?

We've just released in fact - the xen-3.0.3-testing.hg has been updated
with a new version number and mercurial tag. You obviously hit the 
unsynchronized website/hg update window of small-ness.

Ian has sent (is sending) an announce email now. 

Please try out 3.0.3-0; we rely on your feedback to make these 
stable releases of Xen as good as possible! 


cheers,

S.

Re: Has 3.0.3 been released?

[John Levon]

On Tue, Oct 17, 2006 at 10:57:28PM +0100, Steven Hand wrote:

> >http://www.xensource.com/xen/downloads/index.html
> >
> >The XenSource site seems to think so but I haven't seen an announcement 
> >here.  Is rc4 tag the same changeset for 3.0.3?
> 
> We've just released in fact - the xen-3.0.3-testing.hg has been updated
> with a new version number and mercurial tag. You obviously hit the 
> unsynchronized website/hg update window of small-ness.

It has 3.0.3-rc5 as its tag and Makefile version. Shouldn't this be
"3.0.3" ?

xenbld:xen-3.0.3-testing-ref.hg $ hg tip | grep changeset
changeset:   11772:b2f2b7738aa2
xenbld:xen-3.0.3-testing-ref.hg $ hg pull -uv
pulling from http://xenbits.xensource.com/xen-3.0.3-testing.hg
searching for changes
no changes found

regards
john

Re: Has 3.0.3 been released?

[Keir Fraser]

On 17/10/06 11:02 pm, "John Levon" <levon@movementarian.org> wrote:

>> We've just released in fact - the xen-3.0.3-testing.hg has been updated
>> with a new version number and mercurial tag. You obviously hit the
>> unsynchronized website/hg update window of small-ness.
> 
> It has 3.0.3-rc5 as its tag and Makefile version. Shouldn't this be
> "3.0.3" ?

It'll take a few hours for the change to run our regression tests and get
pushed to the public tree. Every changeset goes to an internal staging tree
in the first instance.

 -- Keir

Re: Has 3.0.3 been released?

[Adam Heath]

Keir Fraser wrote:
> On 17/10/06 11:02 pm, "John Levon" <levon@movementarian.org> wrote:
> 
>>> We've just released in fact - the xen-3.0.3-testing.hg has been updated
>>> with a new version number and mercurial tag. You obviously hit the
>>> unsynchronized website/hg update window of small-ness.
>> It has 3.0.3-rc5 as its tag and Makefile version. Shouldn't this be
>> "3.0.3" ?
> 
> It'll take a few hours for the change to run our regression tests and get
> pushed to the public tree. Every changeset goes to an internal staging tree
> in the first instance.

Then why not wait until it hits the public tree to send an announce?

Re: Has 3.0.3 been released?

[Steven Hand]

>>>> We've just released in fact - the xen-3.0.3-testing.hg has been updated
>>>> with a new version number and mercurial tag. You obviously hit the
>>>> unsynchronized website/hg update window of small-ness.
>>> It has 3.0.3-rc5 as its tag and Makefile version. Shouldn't this be
>>> "3.0.3" ?
>>
>> It'll take a few hours for the change to run our regression tests and get
>> pushed to the public tree. Every changeset goes to an internal staging 
>> tree
>> in the first instance.
>
> Then why not wait until it hits the public tree to send an announce?

Everything has hit the public tree now.

cheers,

S.

Re: Has 3.0.3 been released?

[Pasi Kärkkäinen]

On Tue, Oct 17, 2006 at 11:32:13PM +0100, Steven Hand wrote:
> >>>>We've just released in fact - the xen-3.0.3-testing.hg has been updated
> >>>>with a new version number and mercurial tag. You obviously hit the
> >>>>unsynchronized website/hg update window of small-ness.
> >>>It has 3.0.3-rc5 as its tag and Makefile version. Shouldn't this be
> >>>"3.0.3" ?
> >>
> >>It'll take a few hours for the change to run our regression tests and get
> >>pushed to the public tree. Every changeset goes to an internal staging 
> >>tree
> >>in the first instance.
> >
> >Then why not wait until it hits the public tree to send an announce?
> 
> Everything has hit the public tree now.
> 

http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/research/srg/netos/xen/
http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/research/srg/netos/xen/downloads.html

Still have 3.0.2 stuff.. 

-- Pasi
       
                                   ^
                                .     .
                                 Linux
                              /    -    \
                             Choice.of.the
                           .Next.Generation.

Re: Has 3.0.3 been released?

[Steven Hand]

>> Everything has hit the public tree now.
>> 
> 
> http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/research/srg/netos/xen/
> http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/research/srg/netos/xen/downloads.html
> 
> Still have 3.0.2 stuff.. 

Thanks - now fixed. 


cheers,

S.

Re: Has 3.0.3 been released?

[Aron Griffis]

And a couple follow-up questions...

Will xen-unstable move forward to (at least) 2.6.18 now?

Will the tree structure change from the current sparse model to
a fully-populated kernel?  IMHO it wouldn't be too hard to use
something similar to
http://xenbits.xensource.com/ext/linux-2.6.tip-xen.hg plus a top-level
xen directory containing the hypervisor.  Alternatively, since Xen
isn't just Linux, maybe the hypervisor and kernels should be in
separate repositories?

Aron

Re: Has 3.0.3 been released?

[Keir Fraser]

On 17/10/06 11:01 pm, "Aron Griffis" <aron@hp.com> wrote:

> Will xen-unstable move forward to (at least) 2.6.18 now?

This is certainly planned before 3.0.4.

> Will the tree structure change from the current sparse model to
> a fully-populated kernel?  IMHO it wouldn't be too hard to use
> something similar to
> http://xenbits.xensource.com/ext/linux-2.6.tip-xen.hg plus a top-level
> xen directory containing the hypervisor.  Alternatively, since Xen
> isn't just Linux, maybe the hypervisor and kernels should be in
> separate repositories?

Perhaps. We might at least separate the kernel bits from the hypervisor
bits. We like working with a sparse tree as it's much quicker than cloning
entire Linux repos.

 -- Keir

Re: Has 3.0.3 been released?

[Aron Griffis]

Keir Fraser wrote:  [Tue Oct 17 2006, 05:55:20PM EDT]
> > Will the tree structure change from the current sparse model to
> > a fully-populated kernel?  IMHO it wouldn't be too hard to use
> > something similar to
> > http://xenbits.xensource.com/ext/linux-2.6.tip-xen.hg plus a top-level
> > xen directory containing the hypervisor.  Alternatively, since Xen
> > isn't just Linux, maybe the hypervisor and kernels should be in
> > separate repositories?
> 
> Perhaps. We might at least separate the kernel bits from the
> hypervisor bits. We like working with a sparse tree as it's much
> quicker than cloning entire Linux repos.

I suppose xen/include/public synchronization also poses a challenge,
unless it's okay for the kernel to #include files outside of the
kernel tree.

Aron

Re: Has 3.0.3 been released?

[Markus Armbruster]

Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@cl.cam.ac.uk> writes:

> On 17/10/06 11:01 pm, "Aron Griffis" <aron@hp.com> wrote:
>
>> Will xen-unstable move forward to (at least) 2.6.18 now?
>
> This is certainly planned before 3.0.4.

Do you expect it to fall behind again during the development cycle,
and how much?

>> Will the tree structure change from the current sparse model to
>> a fully-populated kernel?  IMHO it wouldn't be too hard to use
>> something similar to
>> http://xenbits.xensource.com/ext/linux-2.6.tip-xen.hg plus a top-level
>> xen directory containing the hypervisor.  Alternatively, since Xen
>> isn't just Linux, maybe the hypervisor and kernels should be in
>> separate repositories?
>
> Perhaps. We might at least separate the kernel bits from the hypervisor
> bits. We like working with a sparse tree as it's much quicker than cloning
> entire Linux repos.

Ahem.  Isn't there enough suffering in the world?

The sparse tree has been an enourmous pain in the neck for me and many
others.  If all that pain is outweighed by quicker cloning of Linux
repos, then you must do that much more often than I can imagine.

Re: Has 3.0.3 been released?

[Keir Fraser]

On 18/10/06 13:43, "Markus Armbruster" <armbru@redhat.com> wrote:

>>> Will xen-unstable move forward to (at least) 2.6.18 now?
>> 
>> This is certainly planned before 3.0.4.
> 
> Do you expect it to fall behind again during the development cycle,
> and how much?

It depend when we do it and how much time we find to keep track of new Linux
versions. Certainly we only intend to track major Linux dot releases.

>> Perhaps. We might at least separate the kernel bits from the hypervisor
>> bits. We like working with a sparse tree as it's much quicker than cloning
>> entire Linux repos.
> 
> Ahem.  Isn't there enough suffering in the world?
> 
> The sparse tree has been an enourmous pain in the neck for me and many
> others.  If all that pain is outweighed by quicker cloning of Linux
> repos, then you must do that much more often than I can imagine.

Yes we do. One option is for us to keep a private sparse tree and have a
script that pulls out patches and applies them to a public full Linux tree.

 -- Keir

Re: Has 3.0.3 been released?

[Muli Ben-Yehuda]

On Wed, Oct 18, 2006 at 01:51:05PM +0100, Keir Fraser wrote:

> > The sparse tree has been an enourmous pain in the neck for me and many
> > others.  If all that pain is outweighed by quicker cloning of Linux
> > repos, then you must do that much more often than I can imagine.
> 
> Yes we do. One option is for us to keep a private sparse tree and have a
> script that pulls out patches and applies them to a public full
> Linux tree.

Yes please! I've been using such a script locally since linux-2.6-xen
has gone stale and it works very well, but I'd rather linux-2.6-xen
returned to life. I'll be happy to help maintain it (automatically
push changes to it and/or make sure the script keeps
working). Unfortunately for various reasons I can't host such a tree
myself, or I would've done so already.

Cheers,
Muli

Re: Has 3.0.3 been released?

[Aron Griffis]

Keir Fraser wrote:  [Wed Oct 18 2006, 08:51:05AM EDT]
> > The sparse tree has been an enourmous pain in the neck for me and
> > many others.  If all that pain is outweighed by quicker cloning of
> > Linux repos, then you must do that much more often than I can
> > imagine.
> 
> Yes we do. One option is for us to keep a private sparse tree and
> have a script that pulls out patches and applies them to a public
> full Linux tree.

This may be well-known already, but if the issue is with the
time/space taken by "hg clone", you can make clones faster with 
"cp -al".

Normally "hg clone" will create hard links of everything in the .hg
directory, but it makes copies for the working set.  Using "cp -al"
doubles the savings by making the working set hard links as well.

All the normal tools (patch for example) will handle hard links
correctly, treating them as COW.  AFAIK the only tool that needs
special configuration is vim:

    set backupcopy+=breakhardlink

$ time hg clone xen-unstable.hg xen-unstable.hg-clone
real    0m8.293s

$ time cp -al xen-unstable.hg xen-unstable.hg-clone2
real    0m0.408s

$ time cp -al linux-2.6 linux-2.6-clone
real    0m1.644s

Aron