From: Herbert Poetzl (herbert_at_13thfloor.at)
Date: Tue 21 Dec 2004 - 17:28:35 GMT
On Tue, Dec 21, 2004 at 06:09:29PM +0100, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
> I know that this thread is old but I have to answer as I'm the
> On Tue, Nov 09, 2004 at 03:53:42PM +0100, Björn Steinbrink wrote:
> > On Tue, 9 Nov 2004 14:35:18 +0000 (UTC)
> > Jesper Krogh <jesper_at_krogh.cc> wrote:
> > > I gmane.linux.vserver, skrev Herbert Poetzl:
> > > > On Tue, Nov 09, 2004 at 08:40:09AM +0000, Jesper Krogh wrote:
> > > > > I gmane.linux.vserver, skrev Dariush Pietrzak:
> > > > > > > I'd really like to test this vserver thing out, but currently
> > > > > > > it clashes with my policy of only installing things through
> > > > > > > the packages system on my computers.
> > > >
> > > > well, either you start building packages for your
> > > > package system, you rethink your policy, or you
> > > > choose not to test 'this vserver thing' ...
> > >
> > > Sure.. I'll go that way. I'd just like to know if the were available
> > > somewhere, so I could skip kernel compilation.
> > >
> > > > > I tried make-kpkg yesterday with the debian-kernel 2.6.9 source
> > > > > and vserver patch, that actually worked, (in regards to vserver)
> > > > > but failed getting pcmcia/wireless to work.
> > > >
> > > > well, debian source is debian source, linux-vserver
> > > > patches are based on the vanilla kernel not on some
> > > > distro kernel ...
> > >
> > > Ok.. so I'll go for the vanilla kernel in the next try.
> > >
> > > > > I'd really like to have a couple of vservers at my laptop for
> > > > > testing software installations :-) Isn't this a common usage of
> > > > > Vservers?
> > > >
> > > > yes, it is also common practice to avoid debian
> > > > to get a working linux-vserver setup ...
> > >
> > > For any particular reason?
> > Because debian packages are made to work with debian packages. That
> > means that if you use the debian util-vserver package it is best to use
> > their kernel patch and their helper stuff, it won't work too well with
> > non debianized stuff. Problem is: debian stuff is often outdated, f.e.
> > from what i remember debian has an (old) vserver patch for 2.6 (devel),
> > but the tools are kept at 0.30 (stable), thus you can't use the new
> > features (except if the debian maintainers wrote/backported tools...).
> I would like to say like this: Debian tend to ship well tested
> and stable versions. The kernel patch for 2.6 kernel was an experiment
> and I actually think it was a bad idéa to add it there. I have got
> many misunderstandings about this version.
let me ask two questions here, and please don't get me wrong:
a) _who_ is testing the debian vserver tools/kernel patches?
b) _why_ doesn't the maintainer (you) talk a little more with
the developers (enrico, bjoern, myself ...)
> > Also, since some packages have very little in common with the upstream,
> > it's a real pain to fix issues if you don't happen to be the debian
> > maintainer.
> Patches are always welcome!
> > You should have a look at the list's
> > archives and search for message from/to debian maintainers, maybe that
> > helps understanding why, for linux-vserver, the debianized stuff is not
> > the first choice.
> I would like to tell that util-vserver on 2.4 is very well tested. The
> reason why the 2.6 version is not included in Debian is that is is not
> stable (still development as far as I know).
right, as you can tell from the version ... but neither is 2.6
(which you can't tell from the version ;) so how comes that
folks show up which _believe_ they have to use outdated debian
tools for 2.6 versions?
> > That said, i want to say that i've used debian a long time and i like
> > it, but sometimes their (or a maintainer's, dunno) packaging policies
> > don't fit a project very well. Linux-VServer is such a project as it
> > seems.
> Well I do not really see your problem here. If you want to use
> development branch you have to use it from upstream. Stable versions
> is what is intended for release, or do I misunderstand something here?
I'd say there are _many_ misunderstandings on all sides, and
the folks paying for that are the end-users, which IMHO is
a very bad policy ... my 'solutions' to this are (in order of
a) get somebody to maintain stable and devel vserver packages
who keeps in close touch and uses linux-vserver ...
(not necessarily the same person)
b) avoid changes and package the upstream stuff so that the
linux-vserver folks can 'maintain' those packages too ...
c) drop the debian packages and linux-vserver 'support' for
now and let debian folks use the upstream stuff, which
has support and is working ...
> // Ola
> > Bjoern
> > _______________________________________________
> > Vserver mailing list
> > Vserver_at_list.linux-vserver.org
> > http://list.linux-vserver.org/mailman/listinfo/vserver
> --------------------- Ola Lundqvist ---------------------------
> / opal_at_debian.org Annebergsslingan 37 \
> | opal_at_lysator.liu.se 654 65 KARLSTAD |
> | +46 (0)54-10 14 30 +46 (0)70-332 1551 |
> | http://www.opal.dhs.org UIN/icq: 4912500 |
> \ gpg/f.p.: 7090 A92B 18FE 7994 0C36 4FE4 18A1 B1CF 0FE5 3DD9 /
> Vserver mailing list
Vserver mailing list