On Tue, 17 May 2011, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 11:42:52PM +1000, Russell Coker wrote:
> > > In general there is no requirement to reuse the dom0 kernel as your
> > > domU kernel, although I appreciate that some hosting providers may add
> > > that sort of requirement (or a sim
On Mon, 2011-05-16 at 23:42 +1000, Russell Coker wrote:
> On Mon, 16 May 2011, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > > There is also a cost to running old versions of packages to match the
> > > kernel that you are compelled to use.
> > >
> > > EG if you have a RHEL5 system running as a Xen Dom0 it's probably
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 11:42:52PM +1000, Russell Coker wrote:
> > In general there is no requirement to reuse the dom0 kernel as your domU
> > kernel, although I appreciate that some hosting providers may add that
> > sort of requirement (or a similar requirement to use one of a blessed
> > set of
On Mon, 16 May 2011, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > There is also a cost to running old versions of packages to match the
> > kernel that you are compelled to use.
> >
> > EG if you have a RHEL5 system running as a Xen Dom0 it's probably not
> > going to be a desired upgrade option to use Debian/Squeeze
On Sun, 2011-05-15 at 21:14 +1000, Russell Coker wrote:
> On Sat, 14 May 2011, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > Backward-compatibility has a cost, sometimes substantial.
> >
> > I don't think packages in testing/unstable should be expected to support
> > any kernel version older than that in stable. It'
On Sat, 14 May 2011, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> Backward-compatibility has a cost, sometimes substantial.
>
> I don't think packages in testing/unstable should be expected to support
> any kernel version older than that in stable. It's the same same rule we
> apply to any other dependency.
There is
On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 12:23:56AM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
> On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 11:50:58PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> > From the udev 168-2 changelog:
> >
> > * Earliest kernel release supported raised from 2.6.27 to 2.6.32 due
> > to the usage of accept4(2).
> >
> > So you may w
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 11:50:58PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> From the udev 168-2 changelog:
>
> * Earliest kernel release supported raised from 2.6.27 to 2.6.32 due
> to the usage of accept4(2).
>
> So you may want to clean up your packages to remove all code needed for
> compatibility w
From the udev 168-2 changelog:
* Earliest kernel release supported raised from 2.6.27 to 2.6.32 due
to the usage of accept4(2).
So you may want to clean up your packages to remove all code needed for
compatibility with older kernels.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital si
9 matches
Mail list logo
