From: Herbert Poetzl (herbert_at_13thfloor.at)
Date: Thu 29 Jan 2004 - 21:25:50 GMT
recently Enrico and I had a discussion (not the first)
about the future of linux-vserver, and what path to
choose for 2.6 ...
the options seem to be:
a) freeze the 2.4 vserver development at some
point, only do some updating and maintenance,
and continue with a SE-Linux/LSM version of
- smaller, less intrusive, linux-vserver
patches for 2.6.x
- additional security features provided by
- userspace configuration of vservers would
require extensive changes (unification,
procfs security, ...)
- different setup/tools between 2.4 and 2.6
b) extend the current 2.4 and 2.6 solution in
parallel, providing all new features for both
branches, independant of kernel version.
- same tools for 2.4 and 2.6, easy migration
between 2.4 and 2.6 (and back if desired)
- same features, no 2.6 only features.
- more intrusive vserver patches for 2.6
- some features might collide with LSM stuff
- probably slower development for 2.6
c) add an additional SE-Linux branch and keep
the existing 2.4/2.6 solutions in sync
- easy migration on the non-SE-linux branch
- similar features in 2.4/2.6/2.6SE.
- definitely slower development for both
2.4 and 2.6 branch ...
I would like to get your opinion on that, especially
regarding the following questions:
1) should the 2.4 branch be frozen, and if when?
2) is it bad if 2.4 and 2.6 branches diverge?
3) is multitude (2.4/2.6/2.6SE) preferred over
4) is a 2.4/2.6 migration path important to you?
5) what branch 2.4, 2.6 or 2.6SE would you prefer?
6) what branch/version do you currently use/test?
Vserver mailing list