Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC PATCH 00/11] mini-os: xenbus changes for rump kernels

[Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Andrew Cooper writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC PATCH 00/11] mini-os: xenbus 
changes for rump kernels"):
> On 20/06/14 20:04, Ian Jackson wrote:
...
> > But before I ask the rump kernel developers to pull my nontrivial
> > changes, I felt I should give the Xen community a chance to object.
> > Hence this RFC series.
> 
> Are these changes indented for the Xen tree, or the rump fork tree?

These are for the rump fork tree, which already exists and has
diverged (and not by me).  I intend to try to unify them again but not
now.

> It would be preferable to try and avoid forks, if that can be achieved
> by cleaning up the existing minios tree to be more amenable to extending
> without having to hack at it?

Contributions of effort welcome :-).

>  I seem to remember the Mirage people expressing similar views.

Yes.

Ian.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel