[Pkg-xen-devel] Does it still make sense to have versioned xen-hypervisor, libxen and xen-utils?

[Stefan Bader]

On 18.02.2015 16:13, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-02-18 at 14:53 +0100, Stefan Bader wrote:
>> So given that for above reasons moving between xen versions installed in
>> parallel is not as straight forward as one would hope and maintaining the
>> patches to get the versioned packages is some effort, what are/were the reasons
>> to do this? Might be a dumb question but I guess I have to ask anyway.
> 
> Apart from parallel installation (which is useful in itself) it also
> eases regular upgrades, since you can install all the new packages,
> reboot (e.g. where xendomains will still want to use the old tools) and
> then pick up the new tools. Plus it makes it easier to roll back in case
> of problems.

Hm, yeah. And all that coming from tools/library potentially not working well
against and older/newer hypervisor which is running until the next reboot. So
point taken for the upgrade. Not sure about the rollback as with libvirt and
qemu compiled against a single version and being in other packages this becomes
more than just booting backinto the old hv. But I cannot think of any better way
either.

Thanks for the explanation.
-Stefan

> 
> At some point I'd really love to see the ability to install into
> versioned directories become a properly integrated feature of the
> upstream build system which Debian could simply enable. That would take
> a bunch of reworking (since the patches take a slightly too big hammer
> approach) and I'm not sure when, if ever, I might get to it...
> 
> Ian.
> 


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-xen-devel/attachments/20150218/68698192/attachment.sig>