similar to: Xen 4.7rc4 packages available for testing

There was some discussion about the lack of visibility of the Xen4CentOS development process. The Xen spec files and supporting patches are kept in a git tree. I've pushed copies of these trees here: https://github.com/gwd/sig-virt-xen xen-44 is the branch for Xen 4.4 development, and xen-46 is the branch for Xen 4.6 development. As is normal, these repos do not contain many of the binary

> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- > Van: Andrew Bartlett [mailto:abartlet at samba.org] > Verzonden: donderdag 17 augustus 2017 20:57 > Aan: L.P.H. van Belle; samba at lists.samba.org > Onderwerp: Re: [Samba] Samba 4.7rc4. (Debian Stretch Amd64 > packages/sources available) > > On Thu, 2017-08-17 at 12:35 +0200, L.P.H. van Belle via samba wrote: > > Can anyone (

Hai,   Can anyone ( one of the devs)  tell if its safe for a samba 4.7rc4 to join and samba 4.6(.7) AD DC domain. Any do/donts, im asking so i can test a DC join, but i want to test in my production even, since that are the best tests. First test of a clean ADDC install looks ok.   Aand yes, i have already made 3 backups of the DC's, already when i go testing.  i can restore quickly.   ;-)

> > working in 4.6 for some people, but is working in 4.5 > > How can I downgrade to Xen 4.5 so I can test this out? > > Many thanks > > We do not provide a CentOS-7 version of Xen lower than 4.6. At the > time > we started Xen support on CentOS-7, 4.6 was already stable and that > was > our first release for CentOS-7. > > We do currently have both

Thanks George. As there are now quite many options to choose from, what would be the best option performance wise for running 32bit domUs under xen-4.6? Best, Peter On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 7:14 PM, George Dunlap <dunlapg at umich.edu> wrote: > I've built & tagged packages for CentOS 6 and 7 4.6.6-9, with XPTI > "stage 1" Meltdown mitigation. > > This will

This is a community SIG .. and xenproject.org does NOT release XSAs for 4.2. The goal of Xen4centOS was to use an upstream LTS kernel and update those as required to stay on an LTS. Also to do every second point release of xen (ie, 4.2, 4.4, 4.6). All so we are longer term than upstream, BUT we have supported code from upstream. So, the goal is to use supported code for the longest amount of

OK, I've got a basic initial port of the xen package up to 4.4.0. But before I post that, I wanted to get comments on a new method of managing the Xen part of the patchqueue. You can find the RFC branch here: repo: http://github.com/gwd/sig-virt-xen branch: out/git-am-patchqueue-RFC-v1 The basic idea is to put as much as possible into a 'git am' file. This file can easily be

I've built & tagged packages for CentOS 6 and 7 4.6.6-9, with XPTI "stage 1" Meltdown mitigation. This will allow 64-bit PV guests to run safely (with a few caveats), but incurs a fairly significant slowdown for 64-bit PV guests on Intel boxes (including domain 0). If you prefer using Vixen / Comet, you can turn it off by adding 'xpti=0' to your Xen command-line.

On 01/21/2016 09:29 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote: > This is a community SIG .. and xenproject.org does NOT release XSAs for > 4.2. The goal of Xen4centOS was to use an upstream LTS kernel and > update those as required to stay on an LTS. Also to do every second > point release of xen (ie, 4.2, 4.4, 4.6). All so we are longer term > than upstream, BUT we have supported code from

Well when the last upgrade 4.2 > 4.4 went live and XM was disabled by default it took many hosts down without warning. 4.4 > 4.6 may cause the same issues. It's a dangerous upgrade for sure. Why can't 4.4 be LTS for C6? as it's the last build with XM. Any XSA patches should not be hard to backport. and maybe the optional xen4.6 for C6. On 21 January 2016 at 13:09, President

?My .02 is to stay the course. ?As a server admin, I want to be able to type things like: yum upgrade php ????not yum upgrade php55-epel-rpmforge-fancy-package Having to remember all the idiosyncrasies of a system is what causes some type of major failure in the future whenever (1) you forget something or (2) someone else has to pick up the box to adminster. -- ?Craig Thompson,

Its my impression that as a general rule from RH once some software has been released into a major release any further release of that software does not change major version or fundamental features.. For C6 I would argue Xen 4.2 should stay packaged as xen and Xen 4.4 be packaged as xen44 ... I do not believe that Xen has been released for C7 yet so what ever package version is released

My comment was targeted more at naming than support. I appreciate that there are vanishingly few resources to throw at support. I am glad to see any xen support for C7 and am thankful of all those who are putting in time to make things happen. I try to help out when I can but it is all too infrequently. On 01/21/2016 10:29 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote: > This is a community SIG .. and

Hi Guys, > -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- > Van: samba [mailto:samba-bounces at lists.samba.org] Namens > Rowland Penny via samba > Verzonden: dinsdag 31 juli 2018 21:57 > Aan: samba at lists.samba.org > Onderwerp: Re: [Samba] Louis; re:your repo and Ubuntu 18.04 > > On Tue, 31 Jul 2018 12:34:28 -0700 > Gregory Sloop via samba <samba at lists.samba.org>

Hey all, This mail has been a long time in coming, but with the upcoming expiration of security support for Xen 4.8, it's time to start thinking about what our update policy will be for the Xen packages in general. Citrix is committed to officially supporting one Xen version at a time through the CentOS Virt SIG. (Others in the community are welcome to support others.) But we'd like

Hello Andrew, First, thank you for the very quick reply. ... > > When a higer samba version is added? or when the dc with > FSMO DC is upgrade? > > I know its against recommendations to run different > versions of the DC's. > > The DB of the new domain will be in a slightly new (but backward > compatible) format. The domain isn't upgraded. We may

On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 6:38 PM, Francis The Metman <themetman at themetman.net> wrote: > I have tried updating using yum update and get the same error as before: > ========================================================================== > ---> Package libvirt-daemon.x86_64 0:1.3.0-1.el7 will be updated > --> Processing Dependency: libvirt-daemon = 1.3.0-1.el7 for package:

I've got Xen 4.4.2 in virt6-testing. I haven't had a chance to test it, and won't for another week or two; but if some volunteers can put it through its paces, I can ask Johnny to push it to the public repo sometome early next week. Thanks, -George

On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 6:39 AM, George Dunlap <dunlapg at umich.edu> wrote: > On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 9:11 PM, Lokesh Mandvekar > <lsm5 at fedoraproject.org> wrote: >> Moving this discussion to centos-virt@ as it's upto the SIG to decide on >> how this moves ahead. >> >> I'm hoping to have 2 new koji tag sets: >> >>

I have the following packages going through the CBS: * A CentOS 7 xen-4.6.1-2, with XSAs 170 and 154 * A CentOS 6 xen-4.6.1-2, with XSAs 170 and 154 * A CentOS 6 xen-4.4.3-11, with XSAs 170 All these should show up in mirrors hopefully sometime later today. As usual, please report any problems here. Xen 4.4 only has XSA 170 because at the time the embargo was lifted, I didn't have a suitable