From: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>
To: Ian Pratt <Ian.Pratt@eu.citrix.com>
Cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>,
"xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>,
Dulloor <dulloor@gmail.com>,
Isaku Yamahata <yamahata@valinux.co.jp>,
Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@eu.citrix.com>,
Christian Tramnitz <chris.ace@gmx.net>,
Ian@redhat.com
Subject: Re: Re: Future of xenbits Linux trees
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2009 19:13:07 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A295223.5050401@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4FA716B1526C7C4DB0375C6DADBC4EA3417372D258@LONPMAILBOX01.citrite.net>
On 06/05/09 16:37, Ian Pratt wrote:
> One of the reasons cited for sticking on 2.6.18 was that it would
> hopefully encourage folk to use pv_ops if they wanted anything more
> modern. I'm not sure that worked out too well...
Making the pv_ops kernel the officially one in xen-unstable should work
better I think.
> It strikes me it's not a bad plan to have two trees, one based
> off the latest stable enterprise distro (in this case SLES11), and
> the pvops tree based off the latest kernel.org release.
As you've noticed above having two trees (2.6.18 + pv_ops) didn't work
out very well so far. I doubt s/2.6.18/2.6.27/ will change that ...
cheers,
Gerd
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-06-05 17:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-06-04 15:45 Future of xenbits Linux trees Keir Fraser
2009-06-04 16:09 ` Jean Guyader
2009-06-04 16:16 ` Tim Post
2009-06-04 18:08 ` Espen Skoglund
2009-06-04 18:17 ` Keir Fraser
2009-06-04 18:21 ` Jean Guyader
2009-06-05 7:32 ` Andrew Lyon
2009-06-05 7:46 ` Pasi Kärkkäinen
2009-06-05 7:52 ` Keir Fraser
2009-06-05 7:58 ` Jean Guyader
2009-06-05 8:30 ` Pasi Kärkkäinen
2009-06-05 18:51 ` Andy Burns
2009-06-07 17:09 ` Pasi Kärkkäinen
2009-06-07 18:36 ` M A Young
2009-06-07 18:52 ` Andy Burns
2009-06-05 13:26 ` Christian Tramnitz
2009-06-05 13:36 ` Keir Fraser
2009-06-05 14:05 ` Dulloor
2009-06-05 14:37 ` Ian Pratt
2009-06-05 17:13 ` Gerd Hoffmann [this message]
2009-06-05 14:05 ` Christian Tramnitz
2009-06-05 16:41 ` Gerd Hoffmann
2009-06-05 17:58 ` AW: " Carsten Schiers
2009-06-05 18:49 ` Keir Fraser
2009-06-05 21:02 ` AW: " Carsten Schiers
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4A295223.5050401@redhat.com \
--to=kraxel@redhat.com \
--cc=Ian.Pratt@eu.citrix.com \
--cc=Ian@redhat.com \
--cc=Keir.Fraser@eu.citrix.com \
--cc=chris.ace@gmx.net \
--cc=dulloor@gmail.com \
--cc=jeremy@goop.org \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xensource.com \
--cc=yamahata@valinux.co.jp \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.