[Xen-devel] saving domains

[Jared Rhine <jared@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

[Nivedita == niv@xxxxxxxxxx on Wed, 09 Feb 2005 17:35:50 -0800]

  Jared> While "lighter weight" xend would be good, maybe C would be a
  Jared> better implementation language for that lightweight tool?
  Jared> Seems like having the fat Python xend implementation use the
  Jared> fat Twisted library makes sense...

  Nivedita> Wouldn't it be better to carve out a more robust
  Nivedita> alternative in C?

Not better, just different.

By definition, the Python codebase will be a whole lot more "robust"
in terms of features up until the point that thousands of lines of
code exist is a C-based replacement.

Make no mistake, we absolutely need a C-based daemon which can be used
on leaner dom0s where Python is not installed.

But I definitely think the existing xend codebase is very valuable,
should retain the xend name, be kept in the tree, and available for
those who like its approach and extensibility.  People will add
features if they want them.

It seems likely that xend will always be a more featureful alternative
to the once-and-future C-based control daemon.  The same people who
want a lightweight dom0 are going to want small, secure, and
well-controlled feature sets in that codebase.

-- jared@xxxxxxxxxxx

"We suffer primarily not from our vices or our weaknesses, but from our
 illusions.  We are haunted, not by reality, but by those images we have put
 in place of reality." - Daniel J. Boorstin


-------------------------------------------------------
SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xen-devel