Description of problem: "service xend start" sometimes failes. xend reports that it misses xcs. A second shot usually works. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): xen-2-20050522 How reproducible: Sometimes. Failure is more probable on bootup during runlevel initalisation. Steps to Reproduce: 1. chkconfig xend on 2. reboot 3. look for errors on console or in system log. Actual results: Jun 15 17:22:16 crusher xend: ************************************************* Jun 15 17:22:16 crusher xend: *** Failed to start the control interface switch. Jun 15 17:22:16 crusher xend: ************************************************* Jun 15 17:22:17 crusher xend: Traceback (most recent call last): Jun 15 17:22:17 crusher xend: File "/usr/sbin/xend", line 149, in ? Jun 15 17:22:17 crusher xend: sys.exit(main()) Jun 15 17:22:17 crusher xend: File "/usr/sbin/xend", line 130, in main Jun 15 17:22:17 crusher xend: start_xcs() Jun 15 17:22:17 crusher xend: File "/usr/sbin/xend", line 105, in start_xcs Jun 15 17:22:18 crusher xend: raise CheckError("xcs not running") Jun 15 17:22:18 crusher xend: __main__.CheckError: xcs not running Jun 15 17:22:27 crusher rc: xend starten: failed ^^^^^^^^^ [sorry for german localization] Expected results: Jun 15 17:22:27 crusher rc: xend starten: success Additional info: No valuable output in /var/log/xend[-debug].log Maybe it's the bug <http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-devel/2005-06/msg00495.html> which got fixed on 2005-06-17 in ChangeSet
This is a known bug, which (I think) got fixed upstream. The patch needed to fix the bug is: http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-changelog/2005-06/msg00228.html I will bundle this patch in with a future FC4 Xen RPM update, if we end up having such an update. OTOH, it is conceivable that I'll just keep tracking Xen in rawhide and the rawhide RPMs will work fine on FC4 - in that case I'm not convinced FC4 will need updated Xen RPMs.
Ja, that's what i meant (xen bk 1.1717). > OTOH, it is conceivable that I'll just keep tracking Xen in rawhide and the > rawhide RPMs will work fine on FC4 - in that case I'm not convinced FC4 will > need updated Xen RPMs. That's ok for me, but what's the idea in putting a package into FC4-Base but not putting (existing) bugfixes into FC4-Updates? And a (unattended) dom0 reboot ending up in dead domUs is definitely a bug.
The latest rawhide Xen RPM should work with new FC4 kernels.