On Sat, Dec 11, 2004 at 07:09:28PM +0100, Michael Kukat wrote:
> Hi !
> 
> On Sat, 11 Dec 2004, Erik Berls wrote:
> > I think we should try to keep backwards compatibility.  The current
> > instance needs to be brought up to support 1.3.  We need 2.x support
> > and 3.0 will be out next year.
> >
> > I'm willing to be point on this, but I can't do it alone.
> 
> I would like to help, but currently, my motivation is... away. I gave up. It
> doesn't even run on Xen 1.2 currently, and it seems impossible to find the
> problem. No hints, nothing. Maybe i just have the time and patience for all

I honestly don't know what to tell you.  I am running NetBSD-2.0's xen
port on several machines, including three of the NetBSD Foundation's
servers.  It works.  I didn't have any of the problems you're describing.
I did not have to engage in any of the mysterious black art people on this
list seem to be advocating such as using shell scripts to adjust the size
of my kernels; it just worked; and it still does.

Because I did not have, and cannot reproduce, any of the problems you seem
to be having, I am at a loss as to how to help you.  But I do know that
NetBSD/xen works because, to be blunt, I use it myself and I can see it
working every day.

I am disappointed and sorry that it's not working _for you_, but that does
not support the claim that it does not work _in general_.

On another note, I'm confused by this talk of Xen 1.3 -- as far as I know,
what was to be Xen 1.3 simply became Xen 2.0 when it was released.  The
hypervisor interfaces are different, the 1.2 interface is basically not
documented, and I am skeptical at best as to the possibility of supporting
both hypervisor interfaces in a single kernel. :-(

-- 
 Thor Lancelot Simon	                                      tls@rek.tjls.com

"The inconsistency is startling, though admittedly, if consistency is to be
 abandoned or transcended, there is no problem."		- Noam Chomsky