On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 04:53:56PM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
> "Xen - Provides para-virtualization and full-virtualization. Mostly used
> on servers. Will be abandoned after squeeze."
> The Xen page on the wiki makes no mention of this.
Well, I don't know where this conclusion comes from. But usually the
maintainers are responsible for such decisions.
> 1) Will a squeeze system be able to run the Xen hypervisor?
Why not? I see packages laying around.
> 1) A Xen dom0?
Most likely yes. I'm currently ironing out the obvious bugs.
> 2) Will a squeeze system be able to be installed as a Xen domU with a
> lenny dom0? What about squeeze+1?
Yes. It should even run on RHEL 5.
> 3) What will be our preferred Linux server virtualization option after
> squeeze? Are we confident enough in the stability and performance of
> KVM to call it such? (Last I checked, its paravirt support was of
> rather iffy stability and performance, but I could be off.)
Did we ever had something "preferred"?
Bastian
--
Humans do claim a great deal for that particular emotion (love).
-- Spock, "The Lights of Zetar", stardate 5725.6
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100226095726.ga12...@wavehammer.waldi.eu.org
