On Thu, 2012-01-12 at 14:46 +0300, Dmitry Musatov wrote:
> Hi Ian, Hi Ben,
>
> >> Yes, that seems reasonable. Let's do it (but after -39).
> >
> > Sounds like a plan. I'll wait for -40 to begin then check that in.
>
> What's status on this? I see -40 in squeeze-proposed-updates, but
> according
Hi Ian, Hi Ben,
>> Yes, that seems reasonable. Let's do it (but after -39).
>
> Sounds like a plan. I'll wait for -40 to begin then check that in.
What's status on this? I see -40 in squeeze-proposed-updates, but
according to the changelog
(http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/l/linux
On Thu, 2011-10-20 at 05:30 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-10-18 at 10:57 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > On Tue, 2011-10-18 at 04:40 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> [...]
> > > and since some
> > > people like to run domains with much less memory, I'm inclined to say
> > > that this is '
On Tue, 2011-10-18 at 10:57 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-10-18 at 04:40 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
[...]
> > and since some
> > people like to run domains with much less memory, I'm inclined to say
> > that this is 'wontfix' for squeeze. But I'm not sure just how small
> > they are
On Tue, 2011-10-18 at 04:40 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-10-13 at 07:05 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > On Thu, 2011-10-13 at 03:27 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2011-10-12 at 14:58 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 2011-10-12 at 14:11 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
>
On Thu, 2011-10-13 at 07:05 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-10-13 at 03:27 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > On Wed, 2011-10-12 at 14:58 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2011-10-12 at 14:11 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 2011-10-12 at 08:26 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
>
On Thu, 2011-10-13 at 03:27 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-10-12 at 14:58 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > On Wed, 2011-10-12 at 14:11 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2011-10-12 at 08:26 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 2011-10-12 at 08:46 +0300, Dmitry Musatov wrote:
On Wed, 2011-10-12 at 14:58 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-10-12 at 14:11 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > On Wed, 2011-10-12 at 08:26 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2011-10-12 at 08:46 +0300, Dmitry Musatov wrote:
> > > > The config option XEN_MAX_DOMAIN_MEMORY controls how mu
On Wed, 2011-10-12 at 14:11 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-10-12 at 08:26 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > On Wed, 2011-10-12 at 08:46 +0300, Dmitry Musatov wrote:
> > > The config option XEN_MAX_DOMAIN_MEMORY controls how much memory a
> > > Xen instance is seeing. The default for 64bit
On Wed, 2011-10-12 at 08:26 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-10-12 at 08:46 +0300, Dmitry Musatov wrote:
> > The config option XEN_MAX_DOMAIN_MEMORY controls how much memory a
> > Xen instance is seeing. The default for 64bit is 32GB, which is the
> > reason that m2.4xlarge Amazon EC2 ins
On Wed, 2011-10-12 at 08:46 +0300, Dmitry Musatov wrote:
> The config option XEN_MAX_DOMAIN_MEMORY controls how much memory a
> Xen instance is seeing. The default for 64bit is 32GB, which is the
> reason that m2.4xlarge Amazon EC2 instances only report this amount of
> memory.
> Please set this
Package: linux-2.6
Version: 2.6.32-38
Severity: important
Tags: squeeze
-- Package-specific info:
** Version:
Linux version 2.6.32-5-amd64 (Debian 2.6.32-38) (b...@decadent.org.uk) (gcc
version 4.3.5 (Debian 4.3.5-4) ) #1 SMP Mon Oct 3 03:59:20 UTC 2011
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 6
12 matches
Mail list logo
