About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Attachment view

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:
> Hello
>
> I know that this thread is old but I have to answer as I'm the
> maintainer.
>
> On Tue, Nov 09, 2004 at 03:53:42PM +0100, Bjrn 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 Problem is: debian stuff is often outdated, f.e.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 ida 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
preference)

 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 ...

best,
Herbert

> Regards,
>
> // 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_at_list.linux-vserver.org
> http://list.linux-vserver.org/mailman/listinfo/vserver
_______________________________________________
Vserver mailing list
Vserver_at_list.linux-vserver.org
http://list.linux-vserver.org/mailman/listinfo/vserver


About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Attachment view
[Next/Previous Months] [Main vserver Project Homepage] [Howto Subscribe/Unsubscribe] [Paul Sladen's vserver stuff]
Generated on Tue 21 Dec 2004 - 17:28:49 GMT by hypermail 2.1.3