similar to: Removing the kernel patch

Hi everybody! At least xen 3.0 packages seem to be working, tested, and in a pretty good shape... (I haven't personally tested xen-unstable, so I cannot say) I propose releasing rev150 in unstable or at least experimental in the next few days... No, this is not a late april's fool... :D Comments? Ideas? Suggestions? Rants? Guido

Hi folks With the lack of responses to my restructuring the last weeks, it looks like pkg-xen is dead. Now, what to do? My favorite is to merge it into the kernel repository where I have my infrastructure (archive and autobuilders for snapshots for example) to properly work on it. Bastian -- No one wants war. -- Kirk, "Errand of Mercy", stardate 3201.7 -------------- next part

Hi! This might be fixed by upstream changeset 9669, even though I'm not completely sure... I will test and report back! Guido

Author: acid Date: 2006-02-16 10:45:13 +0000 (Thu, 16 Feb 2006) New Revision: 3 Modified: trunk/changelog trunk/control Log: - Change maintainer and add uploaders field - Prepare changelog for new upload Modified: trunk/changelog =================================================================== --- trunk/changelog 2006-02-15 23:05:09 UTC (rev 2) +++ trunk/changelog 2006-02-16 10:45:13

Author: ultrotter Date: 2006-02-17 06:56:29 +0000 (Fri, 17 Feb 2006) New Revision: 9 Modified: trunk/debian/changelog trunk/debian/control Log: Change the version and debian revision, as agreed on the ML Start tracking the bugs that need to be closed on upload Modified: trunk/debian/changelog =================================================================== --- trunk/debian/changelog

Hello, I have set up a build machine for Xen. Currently it builds the version checked out from Subversion with the latest testing version from Xen repository for Sarge every night. deb http://naquadah.org/~jd/debian/xen stable main I plan to upload real and official backports to backports.org as soon as we will upload a version to sid. Any comment welcome, Cheers, -- Julien Danjou

On Tue, Feb 14, 2006 at 10:17:14AM +0100, Guido Trotter wrote: Hello, > Do you mean svn or some other new revision control system, right? Yes, please, use subversion, not CVS anymore :) Reading http://svn.debian.org/, we should ask for a repository. I think the project admin should do this ;) > Anyway, yeah, I think the debian directory should be fine! We can still use > dpatch if we

Hi, One last thought... We haven't heard anything back from Bastian (for which I'm sorry, I would really have liked if he had joined us) and in the meantime consensus seem to have formed on -kernel and -devel, or at least there was no more answers... Which means at least people don't disagree strongly with the conclusions taken... In the meantime, though, there's still the upload

So, let's get started! One of the first changes we might want to do is move away /etc/sysconfig/xendomains... We should put it either in /etc/default/xendomains (since it's an init script configuration) or /etc/xen/xendomains (since it's xen related)... Which one do you prefer? As for the way to do it I propose a dpatch file that changes the two files in the upstream tarball that

Package: xen-utils-3.0.3-1 Version: 3.0.3-0-1 Severity: normal Tags: patch Manpages that are provided with the source are not included with the utilities. Use perl-doc package at build-time to generate appropriate manpages and dh_manpages to install them in the appropriate locations. diff -urN xen-3.0-3.0.3-0/debian/control xen-3.0-3.0.3-0.new/debian/control --- xen-3.0-3.0.3-0/debian/control

Hi! We have a couple more things on our TODO list, it seems... (If we could use the BTS tracking things would be better) (or we could use the issue tracker on alioth, for now) 1. xen-utils: Right now domains get shut down on upgrade... This is ok in a 2.0 -> 3.0 scenario, but it's not in a 3.0.1 -> 3.0.2, where we could avoid that, probably! Should we perhaps try to avoid that,

Package: xen-utils-common Version: 3.0+hg11624-1 Severity: important The packages fails to install with the following error: Setting up xen-utils-common (3.0+hg11624-1) ... ln: creating symbolic link `/etc/udev/rules.d/z60_xen-backend.rules' to `../xen-backend.rules': No such file or directory dpkg: error processing xen-utils-common (--configure): subprocess post-installation script

Package: xen-hypervisor-3.0-i386-pae Severity: normal Forwarding a problem reported by Nathan Hawkins. > I ran into a problem with the PAE version of the hypervisor. I'm looking at > xen-hypervisor-3.0-i386-pae_3.0.2+hg9611-1_i386.deb from alioth, and I > ran into a problem with PAE being disabled in the binary: > > $ zcat xen-3.0-i386-pae.gz | strings | grep PAE

Package: xen-utils-3.0 Version: 3.0.2+hg9681-1 Severity: normal I get this error with xen after some debug cycles, start / stopping nodes. I found this fix on the net, which fixes the problem: http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-users/2006-04/msg01070.html in /etc/init.d/xen: start) + modprobe loop max_loop=64 + cd /dev && /dev/MAKEDEV loop xend start

Hello, I would like to make a point on the current status of the Xen 3.0 package. It seems the current issue that Bastian told are now fixed. So, I would like to heard some report from users about the usability of this package, in order to upload it as soon as possible. If your discover any bug, any strange behaviour or any missing things, please do report it here. -- Julien Danjou

Author: acid Date: 2006-02-20 14:35:23 +0000 (Mon, 20 Feb 2006) New Revision: 36 Modified: trunk/debian/changelog trunk/debian/libxen-dev.install Log: Remove COPYING file from libxen-dev Modified: trunk/debian/changelog =================================================================== --- trunk/debian/changelog 2006-02-20 14:25:21 UTC (rev 35) +++ trunk/debian/changelog 2006-02-20

Hi folks I propose the following changes for 3.1: - Rename source to xen-3. Upstream stripped one part of the version, so the next should be 3.2. - pygrub as extra package. - Rename i386 to i386-nonpae - Rename i386-pae to i386. PAE is upstream default now and pae images works with a 64bit hypervisor. We should think about supporting libvirt. It provides an AFAIK stable interface on the

Package: xen-3.0 Version: 3.0.3-0-1 Severity: serious Justification: no longer builds from source Missing build-dep on libncurses5-dev in debian/control. -- System Information: Debian Release: 4.0 APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'stable') Architecture: i386 (i686) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash Kernel: Linux 2.6.18-1-xen-686 Locale: LANG=it_IT,

Package: xen-3.0 Version: 3.0.3-0-1 Severity: serious Justification: no longer builds from source Missing build-dep on libz-dev in debian/control. -- System Information: Debian Release: 4.0 APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'stable') Architecture: i386 (i686) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash Kernel: Linux 2.6.18-1-xen-686 Locale: LANG=it_IT,

Package: xen-3.0 Version: 3.0.3-0-1 Severity: serious Justification: no longer builds from source Missing build-dep on x11proto-core-dev in debian/control. -- System Information: Debian Release: 4.0 APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'stable') Architecture: i386 (i686) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash Kernel: Linux 2.6.18-1-xen-686 Locale: