The binary installation package is still missing from the 3.2 download page. Anybody know if it has been discontinued or if it is coming up and we just have to patient for a while? Cheers, Andrej _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 5:34 AM, Andrej Radonic <ar@eisxen.org> wrote:> The binary installation package is still missing from the 3.2 download > page. Anybody know if it has been discontinued or if it is coming up and > we just have to patient for a while? >I was wondering this too. Was this already covered on this list or the devel list? I don''t recall anything and after a few simple searchers on http://xen.markmail.org/ I didn''t find anything either. Can someone confirm? Thanks in advance, Todd> > Cheers, > Andrej > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-users mailing list > Xen-users@lists.xensource.com > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users >_______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
Todd Deshane
2008-Feb-28 03:03 UTC
[Xen-devel] Fwd: [Xen-users] Missing 3.2 binary install package
Hi Xen developers, This question hasn''t been answered on the users list. I was wondering if you could shed some light for us? Thanks, Todd ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Todd Deshane <deshantm@gmail.com> Date: Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 6:52 PM Subject: Re: [Xen-users] Missing 3.2 binary install package To: Andrej Radonic <ar@eisxen.org> Cc: xen-users@lists.xensource.com On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 5:34 AM, Andrej Radonic <ar@eisxen.org> wrote:> The binary installation package is still missing from the 3.2 download > page. Anybody know if it has been discontinued or if it is coming up and > we just have to patient for a while? >I was wondering this too. Was this already covered on this list or the devel list? I don''t recall anything and after a few simple searchers on http://xen.markmail.org/ I didn''t find anything either. Can someone confirm? Thanks in advance, Todd> > Cheers, > Andrej > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-users mailing list > Xen-users@lists.xensource.com > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users >_______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
Ian Jackson
2008-Feb-28 14:56 UTC
Re: [Xen-devel] Fwd: [Xen-users] Missing 3.2 binary install package
Andrej Radonic writes ("[Xen-users] Missing 3.2 binary install
package"):> The binary installation package is still missing from the 3.2 download
> page. Anybody know if it has been discontinued or if it is coming up and
> we just have to patient for a while?
If by this you mean a binary tarball, I''m afraid we''ve not
done that
for Xen 3.2. Ideally you should get a properly supported binary
package from your dom0 distribution vendor. Failing that, I would
suggest building the hypervisor or the kernel (whichever you don''t
have) from the source tarballs on the xen.org website. Vendors'' dom0
kernels intended for 3.1 are generally useable with 3.2.
Ian.
_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@lists.xensource.com
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
Todd Deshane
2008-Feb-28 16:57 UTC
Re: [Xen-devel] Fwd: [Xen-users] Missing 3.2 binary install package
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 9:56 AM, Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com> wrote:> Andrej Radonic writes ("[Xen-users] Missing 3.2 binary install package"): > > The binary installation package is still missing from the 3.2 download > > page. Anybody know if it has been discontinued or if it is coming up and > > we just have to patient for a while? > > If by this you mean a binary tarball, I''m afraid we''ve not done that > for Xen 3.2. Ideally you should get a properly supported binary > package from your dom0 distribution vendor. Failing that, I would > suggest building the hypervisor or the kernel (whichever you don''t > have) from the source tarballs on the xen.org website. Vendors'' dom0 > kernels intended for 3.1 are generally useable with 3.2. >I think we all agree that the best supported is a vendor-supplied version. And there are definitely enough howtos on compiling from source on the users list and even some on the wiki and manual etc. The gap that the binary packages fill is for the people that just want to try out the latest stable features directly from the Xen team without all the modifcations from the distros. There have been these binary packages for previous version of Xen [1]. I think another reason that Andrej and I noticed it is that we are both involved with books on using Xen and probably both documented the process of installing from a prebuilt binary. The prebuilt binaries are nice for distros without official Xen support that don''t want to take the time to build from source. Aren''t the prebuilt tarballs basically as easy as building the source three times (32bit, PAE, 64bit) and tarring the dist folder? I think that someone on the devel team is probably the best person to do it, but giving instructions to us to do would be an option too. Thanks for you time and efforts, Todd [1] http://xen.xensource.com/download/dl_31tarballs.html> > Ian. >_______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
jim burns
2008-Feb-29 01:32 UTC
Re: [Xen-devel] Fwd: [Xen-users] Missing 3.2 binary install package
On Thursday 28 February 2008 09:56:41 am Ian Jackson wrote:> Failing that, I would > suggest building the hypervisor or the kernel (whichever you don''t > have) from the source tarballs on the xen.org website. Vendors'' dom0 > kernels intended for 3.1 are generally useable with 3.2.What are the limits here? Would the xen.gz 3.0.3 compiled with the dom0 kernel, such as found with Centos, work with the xen 3.2 tarball? I would assume the compatibility code would let it work, but what features would be unsupported/not functional? Thanx. _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
Nico Kadel-Garcia
2008-Mar-01 11:17 UTC
Re: [Xen-devel] Fwd: [Xen-users] Missing 3.2 binary install package
jim burns wrote:> On Thursday 28 February 2008 09:56:41 am Ian Jackson wrote: > >> Failing that, I would >> suggest building the hypervisor or the kernel (whichever you don''t >> have) from the source tarballs on the xen.org website. Vendors'' dom0 >> kernels intended for 3.1 are generally useable with 3.2. >> > > What are the limits here? Would the xen.gz 3.0.3 compiled with the dom0 > kernel, such as found with Centos, work with the xen 3.2 tarball? I would > assume the compatibility code would let it work, but what features would > be unsupported/not functional? Thanx. >It should, it has for work I''ve done before. The DomU kernels are much more forward compatible with more recent Dom0 kernels than the reverse: it''s not really suprising. _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
Mark Williamson
2008-Apr-13 18:04 UTC
Re: [Xen-devel] Fwd: [Xen-users] Missing 3.2 binary install package
> > Failing that, I would > > suggest building the hypervisor or the kernel (whichever you don''t > > have) from the source tarballs on the xen.org website. Vendors'' dom0 > > kernels intended for 3.1 are generally useable with 3.2. > > What are the limits here? Would the xen.gz 3.0.3 compiled with the dom0 > kernel, such as found with Centos, work with the xen 3.2 tarball? I would > assume the compatibility code would let it work, but what features would > be unsupported/not functional? Thanx.The dom0 interface got stabilised around Xen 3.0.3 or 3.0.4, I think. I''m not sure which, but certainly I believe dom0 kernels from 3.0.4 onwards ought to work OK with newer Xen (and vice versa).. Doing mix-and-match in this way may limit the functionality available, however (e.g. for 32-on-64 you need a recent dom0 kernel as well as a recent Xen). Arbitrarily old XenLinux kernels from Xen 3.x releases ought to work on any newer version of Xen. Another limitation is that around the 3.0.4->3.1 transition (I think) the default memory mode on 32-bit x86 switched from non-PAE to PAE. This will mean that some Xen and dom0 combinations will have been broken due to a change in memory model; as long as you do compile Xen and dom0 to use the same memory model then mixing of versions will still work. Cheers, Mark -- Push Me Pull You - Distributed SCM tool (http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~maw48/pmpu/) _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users