Hi !

On Fri, 10 Dec 2004, Pavel Cahyna wrote:
> Also, I do not understand what exactly were you trying to tell: that there
> is a general lack of manpower, or that maintaining two separate ports has
> noticeably more overhead that having one for both versions of Xen? If it
> was the latter, I didn't know that. If the former, then maybe the best
> thing would be to abandon xen12 support completely when xen20 support is
> ready to further reduce maintenance cost - will anybody care about Xen1.2
> when NetBSD 3.0 is released?

Why drop it? We also don't drop vax just because VAXen are obsolete :)

Are there any details about the changes between the 2 version? I think, it
should be possible to integrate both interface versions into a single port.
Maybe autodetected, maybe minor changes to the interfaces, and in worst cases
maybe a switch in the hypervisor bus stuff depending on Xen version.

But first of all... start with that, what already worked some time. And this
seems to be a real problem. NetBSD/xen seems completely broken somehow. I just
build a kernel from 28-apr-2004 and somewhen in may, when there was some bigger
checkin - always the same problem, Xen/NetBSD eats all the CPU and does
nothing. Tried this with all available Xen binaries and the xen12 package.
Something is really broken here.

...Michael

-- 
http://www.unixiron.org/    Home Powered by: (Net|Open|Free)BSD IRIX NonStop-UX
Solaris AIX HP-UX Tru64 MUNIX Ultrix VMS SINIX Dolphin_Unix OpenStep MacOS A/UX