Re: [Xen-users] virsh vs. xm, and questions about different distributions of Xen

[Nico Kadel-Garcia <nkadel@xxxxxxxxx>]

David Stone wrote:
> Virsh (the xm-like tool that comes with libvirt) uses .xml files to
> define and describe DomUs.  xm uses simple configuration files to
> define and describe DomUs.  Is there any interoperability between
> these two?  Like can virsh take an xm DomU config file, or vice versa?
>  Or is there a tool to translate between them?
>
> On a somewhat related note, can anyone tell me at a high level what is
> different between the "vanilla" Xen source/distribution, and the Xen
> source/distribution that comes with, for example, Fedora?  I know
> Fedora includes libvirt when you choose "Virtualization" during
> install, but I'm interested in changes made to the source by Fedora at
> a lower level, for example:
>  - Changes to the hypervisor itself
>  - Changes to the paravirtualized kernel
>  - Changes to various support files and scripts...for example all the
> stuff in /etc/xen/scripts.
>   
You can pick apart the SRPM for Xen to see the differences. But they 
include features like:
* package management to report configuration changes, put documentation 
in place, report compilation requirements, and ease removal or upgrade
* version control to report requirements or conflicts
* integration of modifications to /etc/ld.so.conf.d/ to prevent the 
/lib/tls emulation problems.
* setup of new kernels in /etc/grub.conf
* Integration and dependency reporting for related tools like 
virt-install and virt-manager
Etc., etc., etc. I'd love to see the Fedora changes folded back to the 
Xensource versions, especially for the RPM's.
_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users