Subject: Re: Xen3 update
To: Jeff Rizzo <riz@NetBSD.org>
From: Manuel Bouyer <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 03/07/2006 20:24:32
On Tue, Mar 07, 2006 at 10:21:00AM -0800, Jeff Rizzo wrote:
> Manuel Bouyer wrote:
> > Hi,
> > I've just commited some of my current work on Xen-3.0 support.
> > This include xenbus (the interface to xenstore) and a network frontend
> > driver. I also added a kernel config file (XEN3_U).
> Manuel, thanks for all your work on this! I do have a couple questions
> regarding the shipped kernel configs, though...
> - since XENU and XEN3_U share most config information, shouldn't they
> both be created in terms of a file they include with all the common bits
> factored into a single file? We've been having quite a proliferation of
> similar-but-not-quite-the-same configs, and it would be nice to only
> have one place to change things.
Sure, this is on my todo list. More things should be shared between the
> - (off topic for the current change, but still curious) Since a domU
> can't run an X server, should the XENU configs have "options INSECURE"
> by default?
INSECURE doesn't affect only the ability to run a X server. I think
a default Xen system behavior should be as close as possible to a plain
Manuel Bouyer <email@example.com>
NetBSD: 26 ans d'experience feront toujours la difference