[gentoo-user] Re: OT: Linus ranting about Gnome3
FWIW, I recently tried Windows 8 beta (on virtualbox, of course) and I found it unusable. Why? Because they are rushing to catch up with gnome3. Their new desktop looks very much like a smartphone. I guess they figure the desktop will be extinct relatively soon and their customer base will vanish unless they capture the smartphone market.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: OT: Linus ranting about Gnome3
On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 1:27 PM, walt wrote: > FWIW, I recently tried Windows 8 beta (on virtualbox, of course) > and I found it unusable. Why? Because they are rushing to > catch up with gnome3. Their new desktop looks very much like > a smartphone. > > I guess they figure the desktop will be extinct relatively soon > and their customer base will vanish unless they capture the > smartphone market. Or they realized that the "old" users doesn't really matter, because what is important is the younger generation being raised using smartphones and tablets, and which play with Wii, Xbox Kinect or PS3 Move. That's the important market, and the future. BTW, using GNOME 3 for more than one year in my laptop and desktop, and I love it. I also want a tablet with it. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
[gentoo-user] Re: OT: Gnome3
On 06/16/2012 12:01 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: > BTW, using GNOME 3 for more than one year in my laptop and desktop, > and I love it. I also want a tablet with it. Are you using any of the extensions Linus was discussing? I'm using gnome3 in fallback mode because most of my machines are too old to have the hardware needed to run ghome-shell. I haven't tried any gnome3 extensions yet on my one new machine that will run gnome-shell.
[gentoo-user] Re: OT: Linus ranting about Gnome3
On 16/06/12 21:27, walt wrote: I guess they figure the desktop will be extinct relatively soon and their customer base will vanish unless they capture the smartphone market. Ah yes, the death of the desktop PC, which is happening for 15 years now. Are we dead yet?
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: OT: Linus ranting about Gnome3
On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 4:00 PM, Nikos Chantziaras wrote: > On 16/06/12 21:27, walt wrote: >> >> I guess they figure the desktop will be extinct relatively soon >> and their customer base will vanish unless they capture the >> smartphone market. > > > Ah yes, the death of the desktop PC, which is happening for 15 years now. Who said anything about it dying? > Are we dead yet? No, we are avolving. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: OT: Linus ranting about Gnome3
On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 5:00 PM, Nikos Chantziaras wrote: > On 16/06/12 21:27, walt wrote: > >> I guess they figure the desktop will be extinct relatively soon >> and their customer base will vanish unless they capture the >> smartphone market. >> > > Ah yes, the death of the desktop PC, which is happening for 15 years now. > > Are we dead yet? > I'm not holding my breath. There will always be a divide for the power users. A single, under-powered interface isn't going to cut it for a lot of us. X provides us with the flexibility that isn't available with the mobile interface.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: OT: Linus ranting about Gnome3
On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 00:00:04 +0300 Nikos Chantziaras wrote: > On 16/06/12 21:27, walt wrote: > > I guess they figure the desktop will be extinct relatively soon > > and their customer base will vanish unless they capture the > > smartphone market. > > Ah yes, the death of the desktop PC, which is happening for 15 years > now. > > Are we dead yet? > > Fine comment. Yes indeed, Microsoft's *real* cash cow - millions of corporate desktops running $LATEST_WINDOWS and $LATEST_OFFICE are all going to die out inthe next year. Not. -- Alan McKinnnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: OT: Linus ranting about Gnome3
On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 5:10 PM, Matthew Finkel wrote: > On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 5:00 PM, Nikos Chantziaras wrote: >> >> On 16/06/12 21:27, walt wrote: >>> >>> I guess they figure the desktop will be extinct relatively soon >>> and their customer base will vanish unless they capture the >>> smartphone market. >> >> >> Ah yes, the death of the desktop PC, which is happening for 15 years now. >> >> Are we dead yet? > > > I'm not holding my breath. There will always be a divide for the power > users. A single, under-powered interface isn't going to cut it for a lot of > us. X provides us with the flexibility that isn't available with the mobile > interface. Even in the Microsoft world, I can't easily imagine them ditching the old UI paradigm for their Windows Server products. They've come a long way in making Windows CLI-friendly (see PowerShell), but they haven't yet (AFAIK) provided a good mechanism for remote CLI access. Not that they won't be able to bolt one in easily enough; CSRSS means they should be able to provide, e.g. an SSH daemon, give the connecting user a PowerShell login session[1], and give it equal privileges and security controls as they have for any other login session. [1] A 'screen' workalike would be useful, but I don't know how quickly they'll jump on that. -- :wq
[gentoo-user] Re: OT: Linus ranting about Gnome3
On 06/16/2012 02:12 PM, Alan McKinnon wrote: > On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 00:00:04 +0300 > Nikos Chantziaras wrote: > >> On 16/06/12 21:27, walt wrote: >>> I guess they figure the desktop will be extinct relatively soon >>> and their customer base will vanish unless they capture the >>> smartphone market. >> >> Ah yes, the death of the desktop PC, which is happening for 15 years >> now. >> >> Are we dead yet? >> >> > > Fine comment. > > Yes indeed, Microsoft's *real* cash cow - millions of corporate > desktops running $LATEST_WINDOWS and $LATEST_OFFICE are all going to > die out in the next year. Not. True enough. I'm forced to live in exactly that environment at work. A couple of years ago some beancounters discovered that the City of Los Angeles could save $BIG-MONEY by dumping MS and switching to the for-profit version of google docs. That caused a big stink over security and reliability, naturally, but in the end the beancounters won the argument. Corporations got beancounters too, ya know ;)
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: OT: Linus ranting about Gnome3
On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 5:30 PM, Michael Mol wrote: > On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 5:10 PM, Matthew Finkel > wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 5:00 PM, Nikos Chantziaras > wrote: > >> > >> On 16/06/12 21:27, walt wrote: > >>> > >>> I guess they figure the desktop will be extinct relatively soon > >>> and their customer base will vanish unless they capture the > >>> smartphone market. > >> > >> > >> Ah yes, the death of the desktop PC, which is happening for 15 years > now. > >> > >> Are we dead yet? > > > > > > I'm not holding my breath. There will always be a divide for the power > > users. A single, under-powered interface isn't going to cut it for a lot > of > > us. X provides us with the flexibility that isn't available with the > mobile > > interface. > > Even in the Microsoft world, I can't easily imagine them ditching the > old UI paradigm for their Windows Server products. They've come a long > way in making Windows CLI-friendly (see PowerShell), but they haven't > yet (AFAIK) provided a good mechanism for remote CLI access. > True, and they've been working "hard" to get it to the state it is in now. In many cases, sys admins have had to unlearn relying on their mouse for complete power. The CLI provides options that are, obviously, very difficult to express in a simple GUI (I know I'm preaching to the choir). Powershell has made huge progress in this respect, but it still has a long way to go in order to compete with what we have. And I doubt the server environment would ever become stripped down to the state we're talking about. > Not that they won't be able to bolt one in easily enough; CSRSS means > they should be able to provide, e.g. an SSH daemon, give the > connecting user a PowerShell login session[1], and give it equal > privileges and security controls as they have for any other login > session. > How many years have they had? I'd given up on this years ago.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: OT: Linus ranting about Gnome3
Am Samstag, 16. Juni 2012, 23:12:48 schrieb Alan McKinnon: > On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 00:00:04 +0300 > > Nikos Chantziaras wrote: > > On 16/06/12 21:27, walt wrote: > > > I guess they figure the desktop will be extinct relatively soon > > > and their customer base will vanish unless they capture the > > > smartphone market. > > > > Ah yes, the death of the desktop PC, which is happening for 15 years > > now. > > > > Are we dead yet? > > Fine comment. > > Yes indeed, Microsoft's *real* cash cow - millions of corporate > desktops running $LATEST_WINDOWS and $LATEST_OFFICE are all going to > die out inthe next year. Not. and in corporate speak that means Windows XP and Office 2003/2007 because they work, they don't get in the way of doing things, the people are trained and nobody needs to smudge around on the screen, -- #163933
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: OT: Linus ranting about Gnome3
On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 6:42 PM, Matthew Finkel wrote: > On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 5:30 PM, Michael Mol wrote: >> >> On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 5:10 PM, Matthew Finkel >> wrote: >> > On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 5:00 PM, Nikos Chantziaras >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> On 16/06/12 21:27, walt wrote: >> >>> >> >>> I guess they figure the desktop will be extinct relatively soon >> >>> and their customer base will vanish unless they capture the >> >>> smartphone market. >> >> >> >> >> >> Ah yes, the death of the desktop PC, which is happening for 15 years >> >> now. >> >> >> >> Are we dead yet? >> > >> > >> > I'm not holding my breath. There will always be a divide for the power >> > users. A single, under-powered interface isn't going to cut it for a lot >> > of >> > us. X provides us with the flexibility that isn't available with the >> > mobile >> > interface. >> >> Even in the Microsoft world, I can't easily imagine them ditching the >> old UI paradigm for their Windows Server products. They've come a long >> way in making Windows CLI-friendly (see PowerShell), but they haven't >> yet (AFAIK) provided a good mechanism for remote CLI access. > > > True, and they've been working "hard" to get it to the state it is in now. > In many cases, sys admins have had to unlearn relying on their mouse > for complete power. The CLI provides options that are, obviously, very > difficult > to express in a simple GUI (I know I'm preaching to the choir). Powershell > has > made huge progress in this respect, but it still has a long way to go in > order to > compete with what we have. And I doubt the server environment would ever > become stripped down to the state we're talking about. Actually, they're there as of Windows Server 2008. It's called "Windows Server 2008 Core". According to "Windows Server 2008: The Definitive Guide", you log into one of these systems and all you get (by default) is a terminal window with an instance of cmd.exe. It goes on to list seven server roles this configuration supports: * Active Directory and Active Directory Lightweight Domain Services (LDS) * DHCP Server * DNS Server * File Services (including DFSR and NFS) * Print Services * Streaming Media Services * Windows Server Virtualization (Curiously, one of the things you _can't_ do is run Managed Code.) > >> >> Not that they won't be able to bolt one in easily enough; CSRSS means >> they should be able to provide, e.g. an SSH daemon, give the >> connecting user a PowerShell login session[1], and give it equal >> privileges and security controls as they have for any other login >> session. > > How many years have they had? I'd given up on this years ago. SFU is available in the "Server Core" configuration. I imagine you could run OpenSSH under there. Or some commercial entity could come along and provide an SSH+screen(ish) component to snap into the CSRSS framework. -- :wq
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: OT: Linus ranting about Gnome3
On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 6:56 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: > Am Samstag, 16. Juni 2012, 23:12:48 schrieb Alan McKinnon: >> On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 00:00:04 +0300 >> >> Nikos Chantziaras wrote: >> > On 16/06/12 21:27, walt wrote: >> > > I guess they figure the desktop will be extinct relatively soon >> > > and their customer base will vanish unless they capture the >> > > smartphone market. >> > >> > Ah yes, the death of the desktop PC, which is happening for 15 years >> > now. >> > >> > Are we dead yet? >> >> Fine comment. >> >> Yes indeed, Microsoft's *real* cash cow - millions of corporate >> desktops running $LATEST_WINDOWS and $LATEST_OFFICE are all going to >> die out inthe next year. Not. > > and in corporate speak that means Windows XP and Office 2003/2007 > > because they work, they don't get in the way of doing things, the people are > trained and nobody needs to smudge around on the screen, The most effective way I can imagine for keeping me on-task: Force me to use a Windows XP workstation. I won't be using _any_ personal credentials through the web browser or any other part of the system. I'm not taking that risk on a post-support version of Windows. *grouses about people holding back, forcing the usage of particularly insecure versions of operating systems* *grouses at the IPv6 luddites, too; I'd love to use SSL on more domains, but I only have one IPv4 server IP to work with.* -- :wq
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: OT: Linus ranting about Gnome3
On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 6:59 PM, Michael Mol wrote: > On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 6:42 PM, Matthew Finkel > wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 5:30 PM, Michael Mol wrote: > >> > >> On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 5:10 PM, Matthew Finkel > >> wrote: > >> > On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 5:00 PM, Nikos Chantziaras > >> > wrote: > >> >> > >> >> On 16/06/12 21:27, walt wrote: > >> >>> > >> >>> I guess they figure the desktop will be extinct relatively soon > >> >>> and their customer base will vanish unless they capture the > >> >>> smartphone market. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Ah yes, the death of the desktop PC, which is happening for 15 years > >> >> now. > >> >> > >> >> Are we dead yet? > >> > > >> > > >> > I'm not holding my breath. There will always be a divide for the power > >> > users. A single, under-powered interface isn't going to cut it for a > lot > >> > of > >> > us. X provides us with the flexibility that isn't available with the > >> > mobile > >> > interface. > >> > >> Even in the Microsoft world, I can't easily imagine them ditching the > >> old UI paradigm for their Windows Server products. They've come a long > >> way in making Windows CLI-friendly (see PowerShell), but they haven't > >> yet (AFAIK) provided a good mechanism for remote CLI access. > > > > > > True, and they've been working "hard" to get it to the state it is in > now. > > In many cases, sys admins have had to unlearn relying on their mouse > > for complete power. The CLI provides options that are, obviously, very > > difficult > > to express in a simple GUI (I know I'm preaching to the choir). > Powershell > > has > > made huge progress in this respect, but it still has a long way to go in > > order to > > compete with what we have. And I doubt the server environment would ever > > become stripped down to the state we're talking about. > > Actually, they're there as of Windows Server 2008. It's called > "Windows Server 2008 Core". According to "Windows Server 2008: The > Definitive Guide", you log into one of these systems and all you get > (by default) is a terminal window with an instance of cmd.exe. It goes > on to list seven server roles this configuration supports: > > * Active Directory and Active Directory Lightweight Domain Services (LDS) > * DHCP Server > * DNS Server > * File Services (including DFSR and NFS) > * Print Services > * Streaming Media Services > * Windows Server Virtualization > > (Curiously, one of the things you _can't_ do is run Managed Code.) > Huh, I didn't know about this. It's still too limited, though. At least they've duplicated a lot of the core gui elements on cli. > > > > >> > >> Not that they won't be able to bolt one in easily enough; CSRSS means > >> they should be able to provide, e.g. an SSH daemon, give the > >> connecting user a PowerShell login session[1], and give it equal > >> privileges and security controls as they have for any other login > >> session. > > > > How many years have they had? I'd given up on this years ago. > > SFU is available in the "Server Core" configuration. I imagine you > could run OpenSSH under there. Or some commercial entity could come > along and provide an SSH+screen(ish) component to snap into the CSRSS > framework. > I'd actually forgotten about that, I would never trust their implement though. Apparently there's a binary available of OpenSSH that runs on SFU (so says wiki [1]). I've been out of the Windows Server environment for a few years now, so I guess I've missed out on some of the progress MS has made in this area. It's good they are pushing the CLI now. Perhaps in a few releases they'll implement their own of encrypting telnet sessions with a screen/tmux lookalike. Microsoft never ceases to amaze me - with the good and the bad. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Services_for_UNIX
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: OT: Linus ranting about Gnome3
On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 7:40 PM, Matthew Finkel wrote: > On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 6:59 PM, Michael Mol wrote: >> >> On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 6:42 PM, Matthew Finkel >> wrote: >> > On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 5:30 PM, Michael Mol wrote: [snip] >> >> >> > True, and they've been working "hard" to get it to the state it is in >> > now. >> > In many cases, sys admins have had to unlearn relying on their mouse >> > for complete power. The CLI provides options that are, obviously, very >> > difficult >> > to express in a simple GUI (I know I'm preaching to the choir). >> > Powershell >> > has >> > made huge progress in this respect, but it still has a long way to go in >> > order to >> > compete with what we have. And I doubt the server environment would ever >> > become stripped down to the state we're talking about. >> >> Actually, they're there as of Windows Server 2008. It's called >> "Windows Server 2008 Core". According to "Windows Server 2008: The >> Definitive Guide", you log into one of these systems and all you get >> (by default) is a terminal window with an instance of cmd.exe. It goes >> on to list seven server roles this configuration supports: >> >> * Active Directory and Active Directory Lightweight Domain Services (LDS) >> * DHCP Server >> * DNS Server >> * File Services (including DFSR and NFS) >> * Print Services >> * Streaming Media Services >> * Windows Server Virtualization >> >> (Curiously, one of the things you _can't_ do is run Managed Code.) > > > Huh, I didn't know about this. It's still too limited, though. At least > they've > duplicated a lot of the core gui elements on cli. I dunno. That's everything I might possibly want a Windows system for. DNS comes with AD. Their DHCP server is probably the best on the market right now; it's the only common one[1] which handles DDNS updates for IPv4 and IPv6 hosts in the same domain. Everything else, I can easily do as-well-or-better on a Linux box. Being able to be an AD controller on a stripped-down version of the platform is also a plus, if you need to run in an AD environment. That makes adding redundancy and load distribution cheaper.[2] [1] That I know of; if anyone knows of a DHCP client for Linux which handles DDNS updates for IPv4 and IPv6 in the same domain, I'd love to hear about it. ISC's doesn't. [2] Samba 4 can do this too, and I'm looking forward to seeing someone sell Shiva Plugs with Samba 4 preinstalled. And, yeah, Samba 4 has had some big news events this year. >> >> Not that they won't be able to bolt one in easily enough; CSRSS means >> >> they should be able to provide, e.g. an SSH daemon, give the >> >> connecting user a PowerShell login session[1], and give it equal >> >> privileges and security controls as they have for any other login >> >> session. >> > >> > How many years have they had? I'd given up on this years ago. >> >> SFU is available in the "Server Core" configuration. I imagine you >> could run OpenSSH under there. Or some commercial entity could come >> along and provide an SSH+screen(ish) component to snap into the CSRSS >> framework. > > > I'd actually forgotten about that, I would never trust their implement > though. > Apparently there's a binary available of OpenSSH that runs on SFU (so says > wiki [1]). > I've been out of the Windows Server environment for a few years now, so I > guess > I've missed out on some of the progress MS has made in this area. It's good > they > are pushing the CLI now. Perhaps in a few releases they'll implement their > own > of encrypting telnet sessions with a screen/tmux lookalike. Microsoft never > ceases to amaze me - with the good and the bad. Where security concerns are relevant, I'd favor the implementation which comes with security updates pushed through the platform vendor's channel. With Debian, that means I avoid building my own packages. On Gentoo, that means I keep up with Portage. On Windows, that means using things which come through Microsoft Update. (Anything which doesn't, I could probably replace with something running on a Linux box. Again, this is a server context we're talking about.) Also, did you know Windows domain environments support dynamic application of IPSec-based security policies to enforce host patching policies? Some awesome stuff. Got me wanting to learn enough to be able to do the same thing using, e.g. Chef.[3] [3] http://www.opscode.com/chef/ [snip] -- :wq
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: OT: Linus ranting about Gnome3
Am Samstag, 16. Juni 2012, 19:06:30 schrieb Michael Mol: > On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 6:56 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann > > wrote: > > Am Samstag, 16. Juni 2012, 23:12:48 schrieb Alan McKinnon: > >> On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 00:00:04 +0300 > >> > >> Nikos Chantziaras wrote: > >> > On 16/06/12 21:27, walt wrote: > >> > > I guess they figure the desktop will be extinct relatively soon > >> > > and their customer base will vanish unless they capture the > >> > > smartphone market. > >> > > >> > Ah yes, the death of the desktop PC, which is happening for 15 years > >> > now. > >> > > >> > Are we dead yet? > >> > >> Fine comment. > >> > >> Yes indeed, Microsoft's *real* cash cow - millions of corporate > >> desktops running $LATEST_WINDOWS and $LATEST_OFFICE are all going to > >> die out inthe next year. Not. > > > > and in corporate speak that means Windows XP and Office 2003/2007 > > > > because they work, they don't get in the way of doing things, the people > > are trained and nobody needs to smudge around on the screen, > > The most effective way I can imagine for keeping me on-task: Force me > to use a Windows XP workstation. > > I won't be using _any_ personal credentials through the web browser or > any other part of the system. I'm not taking that risk on a > post-support version of Windows. win xp is still supported. have you ever dealt with 'standard office workers'? They want to use the same tools every freaking day. The icons on the same place. The menu items unchanged. The smallest change throws them off balance. Going from one office version to another - like 2000-2003 is a disaster. And while 2007&2010 are superior in every regard these people are helpless if you confront them with such drastic changes. Now imagine an update to vista, win7 or win8 Not everybody is a computer geek. -- #163933
[gentoo-user] the xen-source on gentoo
I want to install the xen on gentoo . But i find the xen-source version is 2.6.38 . So i don't want to use it. Can i use my gentoo-source 3.2.12 with a patch? -- 好好学习，天天向上！！！
Re: [gentoo-user] the xen-source on gentoo
On 06/16/12 21:35, 赵佳晖 wrote: > I want to install the xen on gentoo . But i find the xen-source > version is 2.6.38 . So i don't want to use it. Can i use my > gentoo-source 3.2.12 with a patch? > "Linux 3.0 (and later) can run as guest (domU) and as host (dom0). All necessary backends (and frontends) are in the upstream kernel." [1] [1] http://wiki.xensource.com/xenwiki/XenParavirtOps
Re: [gentoo-user] the xen-source on gentoo
On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 9:35 PM, 赵佳晖 wrote: > I want to install the xen on gentoo . But i find the xen-source version is > 2.6.38 . So i don't want to use it. Can i use my gentoo-source 3.2.12 with a > patch? Most of the Xen found its way into mainline by the 3.0.x series. AFAIK, most of the bugs have been worked out by now; you should be able to use gentoo-sources 3.2.12 without any additional Xen patches. -- :wq
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: OT: Linus ranting about Gnome3
On Sun, 2012-06-17 at 00:00 +0300, Nikos Chantziaras wrote: > On 16/06/12 21:27, walt wrote: > > I guess they figure the desktop will be extinct relatively soon > > and their customer base will vanish unless they capture the > > smartphone market. > > Ah yes, the death of the desktop PC, which is happening for 15 years now. > > Are we dead yet? > > No, it only feels like it (... Sunday morning) BillK
Re: [gentoo-user] the xen-source on gentoo
I search the xen in the "make menuconfig" .And the result is below Symbol: XEN_DOM0 [=n] │ │ Type : boolean │ │ │ │ │ │ Symbol: XEN_COMPAT_XENFS [=n] │ │ Type : boolean │ │ Prompt: Create compatibility mount point /proc/xen │ │ Defined at drivers/xen/Kconfig:97 │ │ Depends on: XEN [=n] && XENFS [=n] │ │ Location: │ │ -> Device Drivers │ │ -> Xen driver support │ │ -> Xen filesystem (XENFS [=n]) │ │ │ │ │ │ Symbol: XEN_MAX_DOMAIN_MEMORY [=] │ │ Type : integer │ │ │ │ │ │ Symbol: XEN_GNTDEV [=n] │ │ Type : tristate │ │ Prompt: userspace grant access device driver │ │ Defined at drivers/xen/Kconfig:123 │ │ Depends on: XEN [=n] │ │ Location: │ │ -> Device Drivers │ │ -> Xen driver support │ │ Selects: MMU_NOTIFIER [=y] Symbol: XEN_PRIVILEGED_GUEST [=n] │ │ Type : boolean │ │ │ │ │ │ Symbol: XEN_SELFBALLOONING [=n] │ │ Type : boolean │ │ Prompt: Dynamically self-balloon kernel memory to target │ │ Defined at drivers/xen/Kconfig:12 │ │ Depends on: XEN [=n] && XEN_BALLOON [=n] && CLEANCACHE [=n] && SWAP [=y] && XEN_TMEM [=n] │ │ Location: │ │ -> Device Drivers │ │ -> Xen driver support │ │ -> Xen memory balloon driver (XEN_BALLOON [=n]) │ │ │ │ │ │ Symbol: XEN_PVHVM [=n] │ │ Type : boolean │ │ │ │ │ │ Symbol: PCI_XEN [=n] │ │ Type : boolean │ │ Selects: SWIOTLB_XEN [=n] │ │ Selected by: XEN_PCIDEV_FRONTEND [=n] && PCI [=y] && X86 [=y] && XEN [=n] │ │ │ │ │ │ Symbol: XEN [=n] │ │ Type : boolean │ │ Prompt: Xen guest support . for -> Device Drivers │ │ -> Xen driver support │ │ -> Xen memory balloon driver (XEN_BALLOON [=n]) i can not find Xen driver support under Device Drivers. it is my kernel's problem? 2012/6/17 Michael Mol > On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 9:35 PM, 赵佳晖 wrote: > > I want to install the xen on gentoo . But i find the xen-source version > is > > 2.6.38 . So i don't want to use it. Can i use my gen
Re: [gentoo-user] the xen-source on gentoo
On Jun 17, 2012 10:30 AM, "赵佳晖" wrote: > > I search the xen in the "make menuconfig" .And the result is below > Symbol: XEN_DOM0 [=n] │ > │ Type : boolean │ > │ │ > │ │ > │ Symbol: XEN_COMPAT_XENFS [=n] │ > │ Type : boolean │ > │ Prompt: Create compatibility mount point /proc/xen │ > │ Defined at drivers/xen/Kconfig:97 │ > │ Depends on: XEN [=n] && XENFS [=n] │ > │ Location: │ > │ -> Device Drivers │ > │ -> Xen driver support │ > │ -> Xen filesystem (XENFS [=n]) │ > │ │ > │ │ > │ Symbol: XEN_MAX_DOMAIN_MEMORY [=] │ > │ Type : integer │ > │ │ > │ │ > │ Symbol: XEN_GNTDEV [=n] │ > │ Type : tristate │ > │ Prompt: userspace grant access device driver │ > │ Defined at drivers/xen/Kconfig:123 │ > │ Depends on: XEN [=n] │ > │ Location: │ > │ -> Device Drivers │ > │ -> Xen driver support │ > │ Selects: MMU_NOTIFIER [=y] > Symbol: XEN_PRIVILEGED_GUEST [=n] │ > │ Type : boolean │ > │ │ > │ │ > │ Symbol: XEN_SELFBALLOONING [=n] │ > │ Type : boolean │ > │ Prompt: Dynamically self-balloon kernel memory to target │ > │ Defined at drivers/xen/Kconfig:12 │ > │ Depends on: XEN [=n] && XEN_BALLOON [=n] && CLEANCACHE [=n] && SWAP [=y] && XEN_TMEM [=n] │ > │ Location: │ > │ -> Device Drivers │ > │ -> Xen driver support │ > │ -> Xen memory balloon driver (XEN_BALLOON [=n]) │ > │ │ > │ │ > │ Symbol: XEN_PVHVM [=n] │ > │ Type : boolean │ > │ │ > │ │ > │ Symbol: PCI_XEN [=n] │ > │ Type : boolean │ > │ Selects: SWIOTLB_XEN [=n] │ > │ Selected by: XEN_PCIDEV_FRONTEND [=n] && PCI [=y] && X86 [=y] && XEN [=n] │ > │ │ > │ │ > │ Symbol: XEN [=n] │ > │ Type : boolean │ > │ Prompt: Xen guest support > . > for >-> Device Drivers │ > │ -> Xen driver support │ > │ -> Xen memory balloon driver (XEN_BALLOON [=n]) > i can not find X
Re: [gentoo-user] the xen-source on gentoo
On Jun 17, 2012 10:59 AM, "Pandu Poluan" wrote: > > > On Jun 17, 2012 10:30 AM, "赵佳晖" wrote: > > [--snip--] > > The "Xen" config will not be visible until you configure other settings in the "Processor" page. > > There are several; rather than listing them all here, please see the following page by yours truly: > > http://en.gentoo-wiki.com/wiki/User:Pepoluan/Paravirtualized_Gentoo_VMs_on_XenServer > I forgot to stress: The page is kind of out-of-date, e.g., comments about staying away from 3.0. The menuconfig options might also get shuffled around, but the gist of it is still the same: There are options you need to set in a certain way before XEN option becomes visible. Rgds,
Re: [gentoo-user] the xen-source on gentoo
In my "Processor" page, i just find the "kvm support".. --- Paravirtualized guest support │ │ │ │ [ ] Paravirtual steal time accounting (NEW) │ │ │ │ [ ] KVM paravirtualized clock (NEW) │ │ │ │ [ ] KVM Guest support (NEW) │ │ │ │ [ ] Lguest guest support (NEW) │ │ │ │ [ ] Enable paravirtualization code (NEW) │ │ │ │ │ │ 2012/6/17 Pandu Poluan > > On Jun 17, 2012 10:59 AM, "Pandu Poluan" wrote: > > > > > > On Jun 17, 2012 10:30 AM, "赵佳晖" wrote: > > > > > [--snip--] > > > > > The "Xen" config will not be visible until you configure other settings > in the "Processor" page. > > > > There are several; rather than listing them all here, please see the > following page by yours truly: > > > > > http://en.gentoo-wiki.com/wiki/User:Pepoluan/Paravirtualized_Gentoo_VMs_on_XenServer > > > > I forgot to stress: The page is kind of out-of-date, e.g., comments about > staying away from 3.0. The menuconfig options might also get shuffled > around, but the gist of it is still the same: There are options you need to > set in a certain way before XEN option becomes visible. > > Rgds, > -- 好好学习，天天向上！！！
Re: [gentoo-user] the xen-source on gentoo
On Jun 17, 2012 12:29 PM, "赵佳晖" wrote: > > In my "Processor" page, i just find the "kvm support".. > --- Paravirtualized guest support │ │ > │ │ [ ] Paravirtual steal time accounting (NEW) │ │ > │ │ [ ] KVM paravirtualized clock (NEW) │ │ > │ │ [ ] KVM Guest support (NEW) │ │ > │ │ [ ] Lguest guest support (NEW) │ │ > │ │ [ ] Enable paravirtualization code (NEW) │ │ > │ │ │ │ > > Please do not top-post. Try turning on "Enable paravirtualization code". Rgds,
