On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 04:38:10PM +0200, Csillag Kristof wrote: > We should move this to this thread (#536175), > because the other bug report (#536176) is about a different issue. > > Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 04:10:31PM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote: > > > >> On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 04:19:39PM +0300, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: > >> > >>> Uhm, that's really weird. What was the reason for disabling Xen HVM > >>> support? > >>> It's removing half of the Xen functionality in Debian.. > >>> > >> Xen upstream decided to move the patches in qemu upstream. So this needs > >> to be built from qemu in the future, but this is not nearly ready. > >> > >> > > > > Oh, it's about ioemu-remote stuff. > > > > You could also include a tarball of qemu-xen tree (or whatever the correct > > tree > > is) if that helps? > >
Actually I don't think you should build the upstream qemu for xen 3.4.0. Xen 3.4.0 uses it's own version of qemu, not the upstream qemu, afaik. Redhat has been working on (sending patches) making it _possible_ to use upstream qemu, but Xen project is not atm supporting/testing that. -- Pasi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
