Aurélien, I forgot to comment your questions on my last e-mail. I'm worried about that too. My main concern is that I can run Xen almost on any machine I have, but KVM will only run on that that the processor has virtualization extensions (isn't it?). If KVM prove to be better supported that Xen I think I can consider using it, but right now it only limits my options. Cheers, Leandro. <div>2008/4/3, Aurélien Naldi <<a href="mailto:aurelien.naldi@gmail.com">aurelien.naldi@gmail.com</a>>:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 11:43 PM, Leandro Pereira de Lima e Silva <<a href="mailto:leandro@limaesilva.com.br">leandro@limaesilva.com.br</a>> wrote: > Sander, > > That's what I did: > - I was trying to create a virtual machine with hardy on it (hardy on the > host too) using xen-create-image. > - xen-tools isn't coming with hooks for installing hardy (I've already > filled a bug report about that), so I tried symlinking hardy.d to edgy.d > just like the symlinks from feisty.d and gutsy.d. > - Runned: xen-create-image --force --fs ext3 --image-dev > /dev/group/volume_root --memory 512 --passwd --swap-dev > /dev/group/volume_swap --dist hardy --mirror > <a href="http://br.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu">http://br.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu</a> --gateway gateway_ip_addr --ip ip_addr > --netmask netmask_addr --hostname hostname_addr, where "group/volume_root", > "group/volume_swap", "gateway_ip_addr", "ip_addr", "netmask_addr", > "hostname_addr" are actually other things that I've changed to get some > privacy. > - Tried to boot, but initramfs can't find the root. > - Fixed a few things on the configuration file generated by xen-create-image > (tried different combinations, this is how it ended): > - Add "root = '/dev/sda2 ro'" after the memory line. > - Fixed the disk section that just contained "',sda1,w'," inside of it, > at the end it became: > disk = [ 'phy:group/volume_swap,sda1,w', > 'phy:group/volume_root,sda2,w' ] > - Add "xenblk" to /etc/initramfs-tools/modules and recreated the initrd > file. (the same as the above item, what seemd to work after a few > tentatives) > - Runned xm create -c hostname_addr > - Machine starts to boot and hangs at: > * Running local boot scripts (/etc/rc.local) [ > OK ] > > - Switched to gutsy (in xen-create-image), thinking that maybe it hangs > because of some new hook needed for hardy. > - Got the same problem that I had with hardy. Your guest probably doesn't hang, it just doesn't show the login prompt. You will get one by adding the following to your /etx/xen/guest-name.cfg: extra = "console=tty" Incidently, I have been playing just yesterday with xen in hardy and encountered the same problems. The next one for me is that the guest can't connect to the net, even if an eth0 shows up. The problem seems to be related to the new kernel in hardy as the very same host using gutsy kernel works just fine. More info on <a href="https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/xen-3.2/+bug/204010">https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/xen-3.2/+bug/204010</a> I would like to take the occasion to ask about the future of xen in ubuntu. A while ago a switch to kvm was announced. I would like to know if xen will still be supported or if it will be deprecated at some point. The nice thing with kvm is its simplicity when running unmodified guests, but it is much slower than xen when running "xen-enabled" guests. Xen has a number of other advantages: - the xen-create-image scripts make building new guests with xen much easier and faster than with kvm! - xen can use real devices easilly, I'm not even sure that kvm can (it requires full disk image, doesn't it ?) as a result, xen is so much easier to use and efficient for my use case (always running a few systems, without graphical interface). I see few options for xen in hardy * fully supported, which requires to fix the bugs discussed in this thread (missing hardy hooks, missing xenblk in initramfs/kernel and broken xennet in the latest kernel) * supported, which requires a bit less work (i.e. reverting to gutsy kernel to fix the xennet bug) * deprecated, which would be a bad regression if kvm doesn't get a LOT of attention (which is probably not doable in time) is the plan one of these options or an alternate one ? And then what is the plan in the long run ? The fedora guys seem to be working toward integrating as much of the huge and dirty xen patch in the vanilla kernel. If they succed the state of xen in every distrtib would be greatly improved IMHO. Is canonical able/willing to help this effort ? Sorry for the long worries/ranting, I hope it doesn't feel harsh for the people working on xen in ubuntu as it really doesn't intend to: thanks for your work so far, I just would like to get more hints about the future and didn't find any recent "official" discussion about this. Regards. -- Aurélien Naldi -- ubuntu-server mailing list <a href="mailto:ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com">ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com</a> <a href="https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server">https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server</a> More info: <a href="https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam">https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam</a></blockquote></div> -- Leandro Pereira de Lima e Silva