For the last few months, the xen-unstable.bk tree has been very similar to the 2.0-testing.bk tree. That''s about to change, as it''s now time for xen-unstable.bk to break away and see some major changes in preparation for the 3.0 release Q2 next year. SMP guest support is the first item on the agenda. We will be bumping the hypervisor interface version number when the break away happens. This will mean that the 2.x series hypervisor and guests won''t work with with the unstable series. Backward compatibility may be added later, but we don''t want the debugging confusion that mixing versions could potentially cause. The unstable tree is likely to go through a few weeks of real instability before things settle down. There may be periods where major items like Linux 2.4 support and migration don''t even compile, but I hope these won''t last for long. In short, if you''ve got into the habit of running production servers on the unstable series, now would be a really good time to switch to the 2.0 series :-) As regards the 2.x series, we''re planning on releasing 2.0.2 in a couple of days, as soon as we''ve got to the bottom of the compiler version issue that seems to cause problems for suspend/resume. We''re still aiming for a 2.1 release in Q1 that will have the PCI/IOAPIC/ACPI changes that should help with some of the hardware compatibility issues that some people have reported. See the roadmap for details. Ian ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/ _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xen-devel
On Tue, 14 Dec 2004, Ian Pratt wrote:> In short, if you''ve got into the habit of running production servers on > the unstable series, now would be a really good time to switch to the > 2.0 series :-)I''ll switch over the RPMs to have the 2.0 code instead ;) -- "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/ _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xen-devel
> The unstable tree is likely to go through a few weeks of real > instability before things settle down. There may be periods where > major items like Linux 2.4 support and migration don''t even > compile, but I hope these won''t last for long. In short, if > you''ve got into the habit of running production servers on the > unstable series, now would be a really good time to switch to the > 2.0 seriesIs there anyway (using bk magic or otherwise) to get a guaranteed unchanging version of a Xen release? Since all three trees periodically get updated for bug fixes, its hard to create a patch which applies cleanly to any Xen release because the bits may change from one day to the next. If not, perhaps its time to switch to a release model like kernel.org where there are fixed-forever releases and patches are provided to apply for latest bug fixes? Dan ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/ _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xen-devel
> Is there anyway (using bk magic or otherwise) to get a guaranteed > unchanging version of a Xen release? Since all three trees > periodically get updated for bug fixes, its hard to create a > patch which applies cleanly to any Xen release because the bits > may change from one day to the next.well, not impossible but not entirely trival either, in http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=10230752 I had refered to beta version of xen 2.0 bk clone -r1.1397.1.5 bk://xen.bkbits.net/xen-2.0.bk I had some ppl donwloading the same revision of bk and applying my patch so I know it works. You can find the revision number from http://xen.bkbits.net:8080/xen-2.0.bk/ChangeSet?nav=index.html (maybe there''s some better way but I haven''t found it yet... you can look up the ChangeSet on your disk to see the date of last checkout.. look for the 2nd string with "2004" at top of the file). ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/ _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xen-devel
Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins)
2004-Dec-16 16:03 UTC
RE: [Xen-devel] Re: xen-unstable.bk
Thanks for the reply. IIRC, the bk revision number is not guaranteed to remain constant across time, correct? E.g. if someone checks in a branch based on a previous version, do the later branch numbers change? In any case, I''m still wondering if it might be time to have some kind of fixed release mechanism, perhaps starting with 2.0.2?. Is it at least possible to tag a bk revision (as in CVS) so "bk clone -rXEN_2_0_2 ..." works as expected and always gets the same bits? Otherwise, using the method Adam suggests to select a version to base a patch off of is kind of a crapshoot. Dan> -----Original Message----- > From: Adam Sulmicki [mailto:adam@cfar.umd.edu] > Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2004 10:36 PM > To: Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins) > Cc: xen-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Re: xen-unstable.bk > > > Is there anyway (using bk magic or otherwise) to get a guaranteed > > unchanging version of a Xen release? Since all three trees > > periodically get updated for bug fixes, its hard to create a > > patch which applies cleanly to any Xen release because the bits > > may change from one day to the next. > > well, not impossible but not entirely trival either, in > > http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=10230752 > > I had refered to beta version of xen 2.0 > > bk clone -r1.1397.1.5 bk://xen.bkbits.net/xen-2.0.bk > > I had some ppl donwloading the same revision of bk and > applying my patch > so I know it works. > > You can find the revision number from > > http://xen.bkbits.net:8080/xen-2.0.bk/ChangeSet?nav=index.html > > (maybe there''s some better way but I haven''t found it yet... > you can look > up the ChangeSet on your disk to see the date of last > checkout.. look for > the 2nd string with "2004" at top of the file). >------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/ _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xen-devel
> Thanks for the reply. IIRC, the bk revision number is not > guaranteed to remain constant across time, correct? E.g. > if someone checks in a branch based on a previous version, > do the later branch numbers change? > > In any case, I''m still wondering if it might be time to have > some kind of fixed release mechanism, perhaps starting with 2.0.2?. > Is it at least possible to tag a bk revision (as in CVS) > so "bk clone -rXEN_2_0_2 ..." works as expected and always > gets the same bits? Otherwise, using the method Adam suggests to > select a version to base a patch off of is kind of a crapshoot.We are now doing that. Try ''bk changes -t''. You''ll see two 2.0.1-tagged changesets -- however, if you refer to that tag in any BK command then BK will always pick the right one (the later one). e.g., bk clone -rRELEASE-2.0.1 <src> <dst> -- Keir ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/ _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xen-devel
Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins)
2004-Dec-16 20:44 UTC
RE: [Xen-devel] Re: xen-unstable.bk
> We are now doing that. Try ''bk changes -t''. You''ll see two > 2.0.1-tagged changesets -- however, if you refer to that tag in any BK > command then BK will always pick the right one (the later one). > > e.g., bk clone -rRELEASE-2.0.1 <src> <dst>Great! Thanks! One more suggestion (if you aren''t doing this already): Do something similar on the unstable tree; whenever you have something that is relatively stable (e.g. passes some basic tests), add a tag such as STABLE-2.1.0-pre1 ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/ _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xen-devel