WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

[Xen-devel] Re: A proposal - binary

To: David Lang <dlang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Xen-devel] Re: A proposal - binary
From: Jeff Dike <jdike@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2006 15:45:49 -0400
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxx>, zach@xxxxxxxxxx, jeremy@xxxxxxxx, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, jeremy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, simon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, jlo@xxxxxxxxxx, greg@xxxxxxxxx, Rusty Russell <rusty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Antonio Vargas <windenntw@xxxxxxxxx>, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, ian.pratt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, torvalds@xxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Mon, 07 Aug 2006 02:19:43 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0608041150360.18862@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <44D24DD8.1080006@xxxxxxxxxx> <20060803200136.GB28537@xxxxxxxxx> <44D2B678.6060400@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20060803211850.3a01d0cc.akpm@xxxxxxxx> <1154667875.11382.37.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20060803225357.e9ab5de1.akpm@xxxxxxxx> <1154675100.11382.47.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.LNX.4.63.0608040944480.18902@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <69304d110608041146t44077033j9a10ae6aee19a16d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.LNX.4.63.0608041150360.18862@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i
On Fri, Aug 04, 2006 at 12:06:28PM -0700, David Lang wrote:
> I understand this, but for example a UML 2.6.10 kernel will continue to run 
> unmodified on top of a 2.6.17 kernel, the ABI used is stable. however if 
> you have a 2.6.10 host with a 2.6.10 UML guest and want to run a 2.6.17 
> guest you may (but not nessasarily must) have to upgrade the host to 2.6.17 
> or later.

Why might you have to do that?

                                Jeff

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>