Re: [Pkg-xen-devel] Re: Packaing Xen 3.0 etc for Debian

[Manoj Srivastava]

Hi,

While we are talking about Xen development in Debian, I would
 be interested in help getting kernel-package optionally  create Xen
 images. I had gotten stuff working back when Xen was a separate arch,
 but now that it is a subarch, having people who build and test Xen
 images would make inclusion in kernel-package faster.

Thanks,

manoj

-- 
>From affection arises sorrow, from affection arises fear, but he who
is freed from affection has no sorrow and certainly no fear. 213
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [Pkg-xen-devel] Re: Packaing Xen 3.0 etc for Debian

[Manoj Srivastava]

Hi,

While we are talking about Xen development in Debian, I would
 be interested in help getting kernel-package optionally  create Xen
 images. I had gotten stuff working back when Xen was a separate arch,
 but now that it is a subarch, having people who build and test Xen
 images would make inclusion in kernel-package faster.

Thanks,

manoj
-- 
Slow day.  Practice crawling.
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [Pkg-xen-devel] Re: Packaing Xen 3.0 etc for Debian

[maximilian attems]

[ trimmed cc from debian-devel ]

hello jeremy,

On Tue, 28 Feb 2006, Jeremy T. Bouse wrote:

>   I take issue with this because we [the xen team] have never excluded
> anyone and have tried to get all those people interested in solid Debian
> packages of xen to come forth and help. I spent a good amount of time
> before actually forming the Alioth project attempting to get in touch
> with people that had already expressed interest. No one that has been
> interested in helping has been told they couldn't.

please invite the debian-kernel guys.
i'm interested and there might well be more..

 
>   Regards,
>   Jeremy

regards

--
maks


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [Pkg-xen-devel] Re: Packaing Xen 3.0 etc for Debian

[Jeremy T. Bouse]

I take issue with this because we [the xen team] have never excluded
anyone and have tried to get all those people interested in solid Debian
packages of xen to come forth and help. I spent a good amount of time
before actually forming the Alioth project attempting to get in touch
with people that had already expressed interest. No one that has been
interested in helping has been told they couldn't.

Regards,
Jeremy

maximilian attems wrote:
> 
> so the xen team needs either to come with us or allow more of us to join.
> also basing their repo on waldi's work.
> 


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [Pkg-xen-devel] Re: Packaing Xen 3.0 etc for Debian

[maximilian attems]

On Tue, 28 Feb 2006, Steve Langasek wrote:

> On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 09:59:17AM +0100, maximilian attems wrote:

> 
> > as the xen userspace is tightly integrated to the xen kernel,
> > it makes a lot of sense to release both in the same run.
> 
> But it doesn't make sense to release them both as part of the same source
> package,

sure that was never proposed.

> and it doesn't necessarily make sense to keep them in the same svn
> repo.  Can you explain why it's better for the xen userspace/hypervisor
> packages to be kept under the aegis of the kernel team, instead of for
> Bastian (and other interested developers) to join the pkg-xen team?  Is
> there really so much more interest in the xen-tools among the members of the
> kernel team than among the, er, Xen team?

yes we want to release etch with Xen!

not like sarge were uml received not the love it should have received.
the 3.0 hypervisor is communicating through procfs. lkml patches have
shown sysfs patches trying to reimpleiment procfs code and more recently
purer sysfs interfaces.  i expect some more churns in that direction,
so a tight cooperation is needed. 

the separted repo and lists to track are at this stage more a nuisance
than a help.
 
> Holding all the members of the pkg-xen team responsible for what one of
> their fellows has written in his blog would be petty and immature, and would
> not exactly be the kind of encouragement one would hope to see from the
> kernel team seeking the input of others interested in Xen packaging.

i'm relying on xen at my work place. i'm very interested in xen packaging.
as it allows me to easily test initramfs-tools on various setups.
firing up roots on lvm2, md0 or whatever..
looking forward to switch from handbuild rsynced chroots to fine debs ;)

so the xen team needs either to come with us or allow more of us to join.
also basing their repo on waldi's work.

-- 
maks


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [Pkg-xen-devel] Re: Packaing Xen 3.0 etc for Debian

[Guido Trotter]

On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 02:29:51PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:

Hi,

> I guess that if people are able to find a kernel source tree outside of
> debian, they are perfectly capable of downloading and applying a patch too.
> 
> Just include an URL to wherever such a patch is in the README.Debian of the
> packages, should be enough.
> 

Yes, this is the current plan! Thanks for your suggestions! :)

Guido


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [Pkg-xen-devel] Re: Packaing Xen 3.0 etc for Debian

[Guido Trotter]

On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 02:17:45PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:

Hi,

> > I can.
> 
> :)
> 
> Guido, be warned that Bastian often communicates with a few monosylabes and
> SVN commits :) This doesn't make working with him too problematic usually
> though :)
> 

We've been a bit more chatty, for now, but I guess we will survive as long as
the commits are agreed by everyone... ;) At this point I propose Jeremy to add
Bastian to the pkg-xen alioth project (he's the only one who can do that, I
think) and we can go ahead! :)

Guido


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [Pkg-xen-devel] Re: Packaing Xen 3.0 etc for Debian

[Sven Luther]

On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 02:02:34PM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 11:25:57AM +0100, Guido Trotter wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 10:15:39AM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
> > > The current package from pkg-xen is not releasable.
> > Then why don't you just join and commit your fixes before anybody tried to
> > release it?
> 
> I can.

:)

Guido, be warned that Bastian often communicates with a few monosylabes and
SVN commits :) This doesn't make working with him too problematic usually
though :)

Friendly,

Sven Luther


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [Pkg-xen-devel] Re: Packaing Xen 3.0 etc for Debian

[Bastian Blank]

On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 11:25:57AM +0100, Guido Trotter wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 10:15:39AM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
> > The current package from pkg-xen is not releasable.
> Then why don't you just join and commit your fixes before anybody tried to
> release it?

I can.

Bastian

-- 
Fascinating is a word I use for the unexpected.
-- Spock, "The Squire of Gothos", stardate 2124.5


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: [Pkg-xen-devel] Re: Packaing Xen 3.0 etc for Debian

[Guido Trotter]

On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 10:15:39AM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:

Hi,

> The current package from pkg-xen is not releasable.
> 

Then why don't you just join and commit your fixes before anybody tried to
release it?

Guido


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [Pkg-xen-devel] Re: Packaing Xen 3.0 etc for Debian

[Steve Langasek]

On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 09:59:17AM +0100, maximilian attems wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Feb 2006, Guido Trotter wrote:

> > Absolutely true! The current xen team is fully agrees on this position!

> xen 3.0 is out since the 6th of december!
> so it has seen considerable amount of production use since.
> as the xen userspace is tightly integrated to the xen kernel,
> it makes a lot of sense to release both in the same run.

But it doesn't make sense to release them both as part of the same source
package, and it doesn't necessarily make sense to keep them in the same svn
repo.  Can you explain why it's better for the xen userspace/hypervisor
packages to be kept under the aegis of the kernel team, instead of for
Bastian (and other interested developers) to join the pkg-xen team?  Is
there really so much more interest in the xen-tools among the members of the
kernel team than among the, er, Xen team?

> the debian kernel team has always been open to valuable input.
> beeing just annoyed and threatening to bypass on weblog doesn't
> put your team on a good light.

Holding all the members of the pkg-xen team responsible for what one of
their fellows has written in his blog would be petty and immature, and would
not exactly be the kind of encouragement one would hope to see from the
kernel team seeking the input of others interested in Xen packaging.

-- 
Steve Langasek   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer   to set it on, and I can move the world.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]   http://www.debian.org/


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: [Pkg-xen-devel] Re: Packaing Xen 3.0 etc for Debian

[Julien Danjou]

On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 09:59:17AM +0100, maximilian attems wrote:
> as the xen userspace is tightly integrated to the xen kernel,
> it makes a lot of sense to release both in the same run.

I hear that the kernel team don't want to maintain userspace tools.

> the debian kernel team has always been open to valuable input.

I have no doubt about that.

> beeing just annoyed and threatening to bypass on weblog doesn't
> put your team on a good light.
> 
> waldi is packaging the xen kernel in the linux-2.6 way.
> i'm confident that those packages get further enhanced.

Everybody seems to be agree that Xen should be maintain by a team.
For now, Bastian is *alone* working on his package. I know he told that
he had the kernel team on his side, but it seems that's the kernel team
don't claim to manage the Xen package.

Furthermore, Bastian did not answer to our request to work with us. It
seems that Bastian prefers to scorn us and our work instead of talking
about that.

As I already said, I don't really care about who is maintaining Xen, and
Bastian is welcome to join the Debian Xen team.

-- 
Julien Danjou
.''`.  Debian Developer
: :' : http://julien.danjou.info
`. `'  http://people.debian.org/~acid
  `-   9A0D 5FD9 EB42 22F6 8974  C95C A462 B51E C2FE E5CD


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: [Pkg-xen-devel] Re: Packaing Xen 3.0 etc for Debian

[maximilian attems]

On Mon, 27 Feb 2006, Guido Trotter wrote:

> 
> Absolutely true! The current xen team is fully agrees on this position!
> 
> Guido

xen 3.0 is out since the 6th of december!
so it has seen considerable amount of production use since.
as the xen userspace is tightly integrated to the xen kernel,
it makes a lot of sense to release both in the same run.

the debian kernel team has always been open to valuable input.
beeing just annoyed and threatening to bypass on weblog doesn't
put your team on a good light.

waldi is packaging the xen kernel in the linux-2.6 way.
i'm confident that those packages get further enhanced.

-- 
maks


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [Pkg-xen-devel] Re: Packaing Xen 3.0 etc for Debian

[Bastian Blank]

On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 09:59:17AM +0100, maximilian attems wrote:
> xen 3.0 is out since the 6th of december!
> so it has seen considerable amount of production use since.
> as the xen userspace is tightly integrated to the xen kernel,
> it makes a lot of sense to release both in the same run.

The current package from pkg-xen is not releasable.

- Overwrites xen binary package without an upgrade procedure.
- Uses xen as source name, which at least the kernel team knows that
  this may easily break if more than one version is needed.
- All core binary packages lacks the version in the name.
- The installed xen image lacks a version in there name and another
  identification, which type it is.
- The hg-to-dist script is crap as hg is not able to show me the
  revision of the working copy, only the revision of the repo. As they
  propose that to build release tars, this will sooner or later break
  there releases.

> waldi is packaging the xen kernel in the linux-2.6 way.
> i'm confident that those packages get further enhanced.

Already mostly done.

Bastian

-- 
Power is danger.
-- The Centurion, "Balance of Terror", stardate 1709.2

Re: [Pkg-xen-devel] Re: Packaing Xen 3.0 etc for Debian

[Guido Trotter]

On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 01:51:51PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:

Hi,

> The kernel patches for XEN should be maintained inside the kernel team and in
> linux-2.6, they are free to join the kernel team to handle this, but it is
> unacceptable to have some kind of external patch to the kernel floating
> around, and having no cooperation between the XEN team and the kernel team
> will kind of encourage people to build their own xen kernel from mainline
> upstream sources, which i believe is not what we want.
> 

Absolutely true! The current xen team is fully agrees on this position!

Guido


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [Pkg-xen-devel] Re: Packaing Xen 3.0 etc for Debian

[Sven Luther]

On Sat, Feb 25, 2006 at 08:39:13AM +0100, Guido Trotter wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 05:40:04PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> > FWIW, the policy on kernel patches for sarge was that if it didn't apply to
> > the kernel sources we shipped, it didn't need to be included as a package in
> > stable.  We're obviously not shipping a 2.6.12 kernel for etch, so I
> > wouldn't bother uploading that part...
> > 
> 
> And if they do they can probably be integrated anyway! Ok then, we can 
> probably
> withraw the patch! Even though that can make things a bit harder for those not
> running debian kernels since xen is not yet integrated in there...

I guess that if people are able to find a kernel source tree outside of
debian, they are perfectly capable of downloading and applying a patch too.

Just include an URL to wherever such a patch is in the README.Debian of the
packages, should be enough.

Friendly,

Sven Luther


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [Pkg-xen-devel] Re: Packaing Xen 3.0 etc for Debian

[Sven Luther]

On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 08:51:16AM -0800, Jurij Smakov wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Feb 2006, Bastian Blank wrote:
> 
> >On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 04:54:24PM +0100, Julien Danjou wrote:
> >>As far as I understand, you will just maintain Xen kernel images. (for
> >>dom0 only ?).
> >
> >No. The kernel team will maintain xen (in variants 3.0 and unstable).
> 
> Bastian, as far as I know, you are the *only* person on the kernel team 
> interested in maintaining xen (at least I haven't heard others talking 
> about it). I imagine that it is fairly complicated package, and there is 
> already a whole team of people dedicated to packaging it. Definitely, it 
> would be more productive to just include xen kernel images into linux-2.6 
> and play nicely with the xen team to make sure that it runs smoothly. 
> Telling them to take a hike at this point just because you are on the 
> kernel team appears a lot like hijacking of the xen package to me.

The kernel patches for XEN should be maintained inside the kernel team and in
linux-2.6, they are free to join the kernel team to handle this, but it is
unacceptable to have some kind of external patch to the kernel floating
around, and having no cooperation between the XEN team and the kernel team
will kind of encourage people to build their own xen kernel from mainline
upstream sources, which i believe is not what we want.

Friendly,

Sven Luther


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [Pkg-xen-devel] Re: Packaing Xen 3.0 etc for Debian

[Guido Trotter]

On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 05:40:04PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:

Hi,

> FWIW, the policy on kernel patches for sarge was that if it didn't apply to
> the kernel sources we shipped, it didn't need to be included as a package in
> stable.  We're obviously not shipping a 2.6.12 kernel for etch, so I
> wouldn't bother uploading that part...
> 

And if they do they can probably be integrated anyway! Ok then, we can probably
withraw the patch! Even though that can make things a bit harder for those not
running debian kernels since xen is not yet integrated in there...

Thanks!

Guido


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [Pkg-xen-devel] Re: Packaing Xen 3.0 etc for Debian

[Guido Trotter]

On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 05:34:44PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:

Hi,

> > Yeah, it's a sort of kernel, but it's not the linux kernel... And it seems 
> > the
> > kernel team is about the linux kernel, not just any kernel, isn't it?
> 
> The dom0 kernel is a Linux kernel built for the Xen hypervisor target.  If
> Debian is to provide a complete packaged environment for Xen, which is
> certainly the goal I'm interested in (and Bastian as well, by the looks of
> it), that means packaging (at least) a dom0 kernel; and the only way to do
> that which would make the cut for stable is if it's kept synchronized with
> the main linux-2.6 package.  I think the only reasonable way to do that is
> within the kernel team, which means people interested in helping with this
> part should consider joining the kernel team.
> 

Yes, we absolutely agree about this! We also would have liked for the patch to
be integrated in the kernel team's work and from the xen kernel to be built and
maintained by the kernel team (of course we hadn't contacted them yet, so we
didn't know before if they were interested or if that would have been possible,
so it's great to know that such intrest exists!). Of course I agree that anyone
interested in Linux+Xen kernel work should join the kernel team!

> For the userspace tools and the hypervisor, clearly there's no reason why
> these need to be part of the kernel team repo as long as they aren't going
> to be part of the same linux-2.6 source package.  As Bastian points out,
> though, there does still need to be close coordination between the
> hypervisor/userspace tools and the XenoLinux build, because we don't yet
> have mix-and-match compatibility.  

I absolutely agree... That's why I'm kindly asking Bastian to join us and to be
on both teams, so he and other people interested in doing both can act as a
bridge. 

> My feeling is that it still makes sense to maintain the hypervisor and
> userspace tools in a separate pkg-xen group, and just coordinate between the
> kernel and xen teams for this; but that should be sorted out among those doing
> the work.  I certainly can't see any benefits in terms of source management to
> having them in the same svn repo with the kernel, anyway.
> 

Thanks for your comments!

> And are any of them applicable as patches to today's 2.6.15 linux-2.6 tree?
> 

I haven't tried, for now... Bastian, have you? What are the results?

> > That's I think because xen is still young, and is starting just now its
> > distribution integration, and probably will happen a lot less when it will 
> > be
> > integrated with Linux (Linus' tree) and the development of xenolinux will
> > proceed at a different pace than the hypervisor. Then probably it will just 
> > be
> > that any xen version will have a minimum linux version needed, just as now 
> > a lot
> > of other stuff does, and there will be nothing special in it, except the 
> > fact
> > that it needs a kernel compiled for the appropriate subarch).
> 
> In the meantime, to the extent this is an issue it probably means that some
> of this stuff isn't ready for inclusion in etch.  I don't see a point in
> uploading two versions of xen to unstable, certainly, if they aren't both
> going to work with the provided kernels.
> 

Of course I agree with you that until the kernel team (together with the
interested people on the xen team) is able to produce working kernels for at
least one version of Xen (and possibly the stable one) it's better for us not to
push for its inclusion.

We are planning to maintain unofficial packages for sarge (for people that want
to use Xen right now) and can do that for etch too, if things don't sort out
before release. It would be nice anyway to have some more support for Xen in
etch (perhaps non segmented glibcs) even if xen itself is not included!

Thanks!

Guido


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [Pkg-xen-devel] Re: Packaing Xen 3.0 etc for Debian

[Steve Langasek]

On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 04:22:23PM +0100, Guido Trotter wrote:

> > The debian kernel team will maintain xen images with the linux-2.6
> > source. I currently prepare both xen 3.0 and unstable packages, which
> > can be hopefully uploaded today. Maintainer will be the kernel team, as
> > there are heavy dependencies between xen and the kernel.

> This is great! In the meantime we are working on uploading xen 3.0 to 
> unstable,
> and our packages I think are almost ready too! We planned to contact the 
> kernel
> team after the upload to see how to coordinate, but it's nice to know that the
> kernel part is being taken care of! :)

> Our packages don't contain any kernel (we wouldn't have uploaded them without
> asking the kernel team, of course) but we plan on shipping just the xen patch
> for a kernel.org kernel, just in case someone preffers running a non-debian
> kernel: is that OK, or should we remove that from our sources?

FWIW, the policy on kernel patches for sarge was that if it didn't apply to
the kernel sources we shipped, it didn't need to be included as a package in
stable.  We're obviously not shipping a 2.6.12 kernel for etch, so I
wouldn't bother uploading that part...

-- 
Steve Langasek   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer   to set it on, and I can move the world.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]   http://www.debian.org/


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: [Pkg-xen-devel] Re: Packaing Xen 3.0 etc for Debian

[Steve Langasek]

On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 06:32:10PM +0100, Guido Trotter wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 06:06:22PM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:

> > It is a sort of kernel.

> Yeah, it's a sort of kernel, but it's not the linux kernel... And it seems the
> kernel team is about the linux kernel, not just any kernel, isn't it?

The dom0 kernel is a Linux kernel built for the Xen hypervisor target.  If
Debian is to provide a complete packaged environment for Xen, which is
certainly the goal I'm interested in (and Bastian as well, by the looks of
it), that means packaging (at least) a dom0 kernel; and the only way to do
that which would make the cut for stable is if it's kept synchronized with
the main linux-2.6 package.  I think the only reasonable way to do that is
within the kernel team, which means people interested in helping with this
part should consider joining the kernel team.

For the userspace tools and the hypervisor, clearly there's no reason why
these need to be part of the kernel team repo as long as they aren't going
to be part of the same linux-2.6 source package.  As Bastian points out,
though, there does still need to be close coordination between the
hypervisor/userspace tools and the XenoLinux build, because we don't yet
have mix-and-match compatibility.  My feeling is that it still makes sense
to maintain the hypervisor and userspace tools in a separate pkg-xen group,
and just coordinate between the kernel and xen teams for this; but that
should be sorted out among those doing the work.  I certainly can't see any
benefits in terms of source management to having them in the same svn repo
with the kernel, anyway.

> > Just to say, how connected xen to linux is:

> > For example: There are three kernel trees of xen:
> > - from xen-3.0-testing, 2.6.12
> > - from linux-2.6-xen, 2.6.16-rc4
> > - from linux-2.6-merge, 2.6.16-rc3
> > All of them have different needs from xen.

And are any of them applicable as patches to today's 2.6.15 linux-2.6 tree?

> > The kernels from xen-3.0-testing and linux-2.6-merge works with a 3.0
> > and unstable hypervisor.

> > The 3.0 utils only works on the kernel from xen-3.0-testing. The
> > unstable utils with the other. But with both hypervisors.

> That's I think because xen is still young, and is starting just now its
> distribution integration, and probably will happen a lot less when it will be
> integrated with Linux (Linus' tree) and the development of xenolinux will
> proceed at a different pace than the hypervisor. Then probably it will just be
> that any xen version will have a minimum linux version needed, just as now a 
> lot
> of other stuff does, and there will be nothing special in it, except the fact
> that it needs a kernel compiled for the appropriate subarch).

In the meantime, to the extent this is an issue it probably means that some
of this stuff isn't ready for inclusion in etch.  I don't see a point in
uploading two versions of xen to unstable, certainly, if they aren't both
going to work with the provided kernels.

> What do other people in the kernel team think? If the majority of them agree
> fine, otherwise are you sure it's not counterproductive to force xen in the
> kernel team hands if most of them don't want to touch it, and on the other 
> hand
> to risk driving away other people who just cannot follow the whole linux
> business but could work on the xen hypervisor and tools, help coordinate with
> xen's upstream, debian glibc and d-i, etc! Especially if you and other people
> who would do both can still do it! :)

As an erstwhile contributor to the kernel team who's also interested in Xen
packaging, you have my answer above...

-- 
Steve Langasek   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer   to set it on, and I can move the world.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]   http://www.debian.org/


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: [Pkg-xen-devel] Re: Packaing Xen 3.0 etc for Debian

[Jonas Smedegaard]

On Fri, 24 Feb 2006 18:04:03 +0100
Guido Trotter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> The reason I think xen would be better served having its own
> committed team, repository, etc, is that it would be easier for
> anyone interested in xen to follow just mailing lists dedicated to it
> and its repository commits, rather than having to closely follow all
> the linux kernel work, mailing list, etc! Of course I also think it's
> great to have some people on both, so to have a close coordination
> between the xen and kernel releases.

Well said.

This is also the reasoning behind a separate project for yaird (not
all interested in that perl-based ramdisk generator is interested in
other aspects of kernel maintainance).

Similarly I suggest group-maintaining initramfs-tools separately (not
all have interest in dealing with udev).


Greetings,

 - Jonas

-- 
* Jonas Smedegaard - idealist og Internet-arkitekt
* Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 - Enden er nær: http://www.shibumi.org/eoti.htm


pgpYwH4aiPYNo.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: [Pkg-xen-devel] Re: Packaing Xen 3.0 etc for Debian

[Guido Trotter]

On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 06:06:22PM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:

Hi,

> It is a sort of kernel.

Yeah, it's a sort of kernel, but it's not the linux kernel... And it seems the
kernel team is about the linux kernel, not just any kernel, isn't it?

> Just to say, how connected xen to linux is:
> 
> For example: There are three kernel trees of xen:
> - from xen-3.0-testing, 2.6.12
> - from linux-2.6-xen, 2.6.16-rc4
> - from linux-2.6-merge, 2.6.16-rc3
> All of them have different needs from xen.
> 
> The kernels from xen-3.0-testing and linux-2.6-merge works with a 3.0
> and unstable hypervisor.
> 
> The 3.0 utils only works on the kernel from xen-3.0-testing. The
> unstable utils with the other. But with both hypervisors.
> 

That's I think because xen is still young, and is starting just now its
distribution integration, and probably will happen a lot less when it will be
integrated with Linux (Linus' tree) and the development of xenolinux will
proceed at a different pace than the hypervisor. Then probably it will just be
that any xen version will have a minimum linux version needed, just as now a lot
of other stuff does, and there will be nothing special in it, except the fact
that it needs a kernel compiled for the appropriate subarch).

> I won't reject the help of volunteers but I strongly think that the
> kernel team needs to have its hands on them.
> 

What do other people in the kernel team think? If the majority of them agree
fine, otherwise are you sure it's not counterproductive to force xen in the
kernel team hands if most of them don't want to touch it, and on the other hand
to risk driving away other people who just cannot follow the whole linux
business but could work on the xen hypervisor and tools, help coordinate with
xen's upstream, debian glibc and d-i, etc! Especially if you and other people
who would do both can still do it! :)

Guido


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [Pkg-xen-devel] Re: Packaing Xen 3.0 etc for Debian

[Marc Haber]

On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 06:06:22PM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
> I won't reject the help of volunteers but I strongly think that the
> kernel team needs to have its hands on them.

How many members of the kernel team are planning to do active work on
Xen, kernel and userspace?

Greetings
Marc

-- 
-
Marc Haber | "I don't trust Computers. They | Mailadresse im Header
Mannheim, Germany  |  lose things."Winona Ryder | Fon: *49 621 72739834
Nordisch by Nature |  How to make an American Quilt | Fax: *49 621 72739835


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [Pkg-xen-devel] Re: Packaing Xen 3.0 etc for Debian

[Bastian Blank]

On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 04:56:35PM +0100, Guido Trotter wrote:
> On the other hand Xen is not the
> kernel, so isn't it better if there is a team for it, even if strongly 
> connected
> with the kernel one?

It is a sort of kernel. And no, I don't think it is better. 

Just to say, how connected xen to linux is:

For example: There are three kernel trees of xen:
- from xen-3.0-testing, 2.6.12
- from linux-2.6-xen, 2.6.16-rc4
- from linux-2.6-merge, 2.6.16-rc3
All of them have different needs from xen.

The kernels from xen-3.0-testing and linux-2.6-merge works with a 3.0
and unstable hypervisor.

The 3.0 utils only works on the kernel from xen-3.0-testing. The
unstable utils with the other. But with both hypervisors.

>   So... what do you
> think we can do now? Can we join our efforts on xen or you strongly think it
> should be left to the kernel team, and we should just close the alioth 
> project?

I won't reject the help of volunteers but I strongly think that the
kernel team needs to have its hands on them.

Bastian

-- 
Peace was the way.
-- Kirk, "The City on the Edge of Forever", stardate unknown


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [Pkg-xen-devel] Re: Packaing Xen 3.0 etc for Debian

[Guido Trotter]

On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 05:41:53PM +0100, Isaac Clerencia wrote:

Hi,

> I agree. I just would like to ask that, please, don't disband just because of 
> disagreement with the kernel team, but try to cooperate anyway.
> 

I don't think we want to! And I hope there is no disagreement (we still don't
know)! 

The reason I think xen would be better served having its own committed team,
repository, etc, is that it would be easier for anyone interested in xen to
follow just mailing lists dedicated to it and its repository commits, rather
than having to closely follow all the linux kernel work, mailing list, etc! Of
course I also think it's great to have some people on both, so to have a close
coordination between the xen and kernel releases.

Also the xen team would need to coordinate with the glibc team (for the
segmentation issues) and one day with the d-i team too, in order to try making a
Debian/GNU/Xen/Linux (or whatever that should be called) installable directly on
a system! 

Even upstream considers the linux kernel patch, the hypervisor and the tools
separate, has separate mailing lists for them, and a separate mercurial
repository for linux, even if for now they distribute the linux patch together
with xen, until xen is merged into Linus' tree (or at least so Ian Pratt has
said).  If we can have the xen patch included in the debian kernel, thus
pre-dating kernel.org inclusion that's really a good thing!

Thanks!

Guido


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [Pkg-xen-devel] Re: Packaing Xen 3.0 etc for Debian

[Jurij Smakov]

On Fri, 24 Feb 2006, Bastian Blank wrote:


On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 04:54:24PM +0100, Julien Danjou wrote:

As far as I understand, you will just maintain Xen kernel images. (for
dom0 only ?).


No. The kernel team will maintain xen (in variants 3.0 and unstable).


Bastian, as far as I know, you are the *only* person on the kernel team 
interested in maintaining xen (at least I haven't heard others talking 
about it). I imagine that it is fairly complicated package, and there is 
already a whole team of people dedicated to packaging it. Definitely, it 
would be more productive to just include xen kernel images into linux-2.6 
and play nicely with the xen team to make sure that it runs smoothly. 
Telling them to take a hike at this point just because you are on the 
kernel team appears a lot like hijacking of the xen package to me.


Best regards,

Jurij Smakov[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Key: http://www.wooyd.org/pgpkey/   KeyID: C99E03CC


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [Pkg-xen-devel] Re: Packaing Xen 3.0 etc for Debian

[Isaac Clerencia]

On Friday, 24 February 2006 17:34, Guido Trotter wrote:
> Yes, we could, of course... But on the other hand I believe that the xen
> hypervisor and userspace tools are actually different from the linux kernel
> (as they support multiple kernels and operating systems), even though the
> linux kernel patch has its right place inside the kernel itself...
I agree. I just would like to ask that, please, don't disband just because of 
disagreement with the kernel team, but try to cooperate anyway.

Best regards

-- 
Isaac Clerencia at Warp Networks, http://www.warp.es
Work: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>   | Debian: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


pgpWVYyLgLKcY.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: [Pkg-xen-devel] Re: Packaing Xen 3.0 etc for Debian

[Guido Trotter]

On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 05:20:17PM +0100, Isaac Clerencia wrote:

Hi,

> Well, if the kernel team answers "left to the kernel team" and you close the 
> alioth project, I guess you can always move into the kernel team ;)
> 

Yes, we could, of course... But on the other hand I believe that the xen
hypervisor and userspace tools are actually different from the linux kernel (as
they support multiple kernels and operating systems), even though the linux
kernel patch has its right place inside the kernel itself...

I agree that we should have probably have publicized more about our intent to
work on xen, but at least it was spread all other the BTS in the xen package!
And on the other hand we didn't know about Bastian's effort (which was not in
the bts under either wnpp or xen), or we wouldn't have started our work without
asking him! 

Guido


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [Pkg-xen-devel] Re: Packaing Xen 3.0 etc for Debian

[Isaac Clerencia]

On Friday, 24 February 2006 16:56, Guido Trotter wrote:
> So... what do you think we can do now? Can we join our efforts on xen or
> you strongly think it should be left to the kernel team, and we should just
> close the alioth project?
Well, if the kernel team answers "left to the kernel team" and you close the 
alioth project, I guess you can always move into the kernel team ;)

Best regards

-- 
Isaac Clerencia at Warp Networks, http://www.warp.es
Work: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>   | Debian: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


pgpmGGbkDK3N3.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: [Pkg-xen-devel] Re: Packaing Xen 3.0 etc for Debian

[Julien Danjou]

On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 05:05:33PM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
> No. The kernel team will maintain xen (in variants 3.0 and unstable).

Okay, I misunderstood.
You will maintain userland tools too ?
Is you work is already finished and available somewhere ?

Right, I am juste a little disapointed. :)

-- 
Julien Danjou
.''`.  Debian Developer
: :' : http://julien.danjou.info
`. `'  http://people.debian.org/~acid
  `-   9A0D 5FD9 EB42 22F6 8974  C95C A462 B51E C2FE E5CD


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: [Pkg-xen-devel] Re: Packaing Xen 3.0 etc for Debian

[Bastian Blank]

On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 04:54:24PM +0100, Julien Danjou wrote:
> As far as I understand, you will just maintain Xen kernel images. (for
> dom0 only ?).

No. The kernel team will maintain xen (in variants 3.0 and unstable).

Bastian

-- 
Vulcans worship peace above all.
-- McCoy, "Return to Tomorrow", stardate 4768.3

Re: [Pkg-xen-devel] Re: Packaing Xen 3.0 etc for Debian

[Guido Trotter]

On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 04:54:24PM +0100, Julien Danjou wrote:

Hi,

> As far as I understand, you will just maintain Xen kernel images. (for
> dom0 only ?).

Actually I think he meant the hypervisors too... Anyway I also think that if the
kernel team is going to maintain the kernel images there should be some made for
unprivileged domains too! :)

> We just have to duplicate our packages to add a -unstable release.
> I don't think this is a great deal, at the point we are, we can do it.
> 

Yeah, I think so too... But I'm also for making xen 3.0 enter unstable first,
and uploading the unstable branch a bit later!

Guido


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [Pkg-xen-devel] Re: Packaing Xen 3.0 etc for Debian

[Guido Trotter]

On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 04:37:56PM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:

Hi,

> > This is great! In the meantime we are working on uploading xen 3.0 to 
> > unstable,
> > and our packages I think are almost ready too!
> 
> This is insufficient. Either maintain both 3.0 and unstable or none. In
> the meantime, the kernel team will maintain both.
> 

I think we have no problem packaging the unstable hypervisor too, as the kernel
team provides support for it, after the stable one is in debian! Why don't you
join the xen team list, so we can work together on that (contacting the kernel
team when all of them are needed). I think having some people both on the kernel
and the xen team will be better, of course! On the other hand Xen is not the
kernel, so isn't it better if there is a team for it, even if strongly connected
with the kernel one?

Actually I'm sorry I had mis-read your statement... I thought you were talking
just about the kernel while you referred to the hypervisor too! That's why my
sentence might have appeared a bit out of context, sorry! So... what do you
think we can do now? Can we join our efforts on xen or you strongly think it
should be left to the kernel team, and we should just close the alioth project?

Thanks! :)

Guido


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [Pkg-xen-devel] Re: Packaing Xen 3.0 etc for Debian

[Julien Danjou]

On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 04:37:56PM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
> This is insufficient. Either maintain both 3.0 and unstable or none. In
> the meantime, the kernel team will maintain both.

As far as I understand, you will just maintain Xen kernel images. (for
dom0 only ?).
We just have to duplicate our packages to add a -unstable release.
I don't think this is a great deal, at the point we are, we can do it.

-- 
Julien Danjou
.''`.  Debian Developer
: :' : http://julien.danjou.info
`. `'  http://people.debian.org/~acid
  `-   9A0D 5FD9 EB42 22F6 8974  C95C A462 B51E C2FE E5CD


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: [Pkg-xen-devel] Re: Packaing Xen 3.0 etc for Debian

[Bastian Blank]

On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 04:22:23PM +0100, Guido Trotter wrote:
> This is great! In the meantime we are working on uploading xen 3.0 to 
> unstable,
> and our packages I think are almost ready too!

This is insufficient. Either maintain both 3.0 and unstable or none. In
the meantime, the kernel team will maintain both.

Bastian

-- 
Extreme feminine beauty is always disturbing.
-- Spock, "The Cloud Minders", stardate 5818.4


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [Pkg-xen-devel] Re: Packaing Xen 3.0 etc for Debian

[Guido Trotter]

Bastian Blank wrote:

Hi!

> The debian kernel team will maintain xen images with the linux-2.6
> source. I currently prepare both xen 3.0 and unstable packages, which
> can be hopefully uploaded today. Maintainer will be the kernel team, as
> there are heavy dependencies between xen and the kernel.

This is great! In the meantime we are working on uploading xen 3.0 to unstable,
and our packages I think are almost ready too! We planned to contact the kernel
team after the upload to see how to coordinate, but it's nice to know that the
kernel part is being taken care of! :)

Our packages don't contain any kernel (we wouldn't have uploaded them without
asking the kernel team, of course) but we plan on shipping just the xen patch
for a kernel.org kernel, just in case someone preffers running a non-debian
kernel: is that OK, or should we remove that from our sources?

Guido


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]