On Sun, Aug 07, 2011 at 12:48:33AM -0500, Corey Wright wrote:
> On Sat, 30 Jul 2011 23:22:40 -0500
> Corey Wright <undefined@pobox.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 21:19:44 +0200Herbert Poetzl <herbert@13thfloor.at> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 03:36:10PM +0200, Herbert Poetzl wrote:
>>>> There have been numerous 'requests' for a new Stable
>>>> release and it seems like the Linux-VServer community
>>>> is willing to 'sponsor' the stabilization process ...
>>> [zapped]
>>>> thus the first thing is to select a kernel we want
>>>> to stabilize for a stable release ...
>>>> options IMHO are:
>>>> - 2.6.32.x (has performance issues, but is long term)
>>>> - 2.6.38.x (good performance, not longterm yet)
>>>> - 3.0.x (immature, but the future)
> ...
>> my personal preference is the first 3.x to go longterm
>> because, as ed, benedikt, and i believe others have said...
> ...
>> this leaves 3.x, which i figure will be the next longterm
>> kernel (though maybe 2.6.39). note i'm not saying 3.0.y,
>> because i don't know that anybody will pick up 3.0 for
>> longterm. it'll receive stable support, but how far will that
>> take it and do we care that after ~6 months our targeted
>> kernel has no upstream support? in a week or two i intend
>> to test the 3.0 kernel with the latest vserver patch on
>> debian squeeze (my preferred vserver host distro) to test the
>> viability of using a stable vserver patch against 3.x with
>> squeeze, though i'm pretty sure i'll have to use a backported
>> kernel-package and possibly initramfs-tools, etc.
> today i compiled and tested linux 3.0.1-vs2.3.1-pre8 with
> util-vserver 0.30.216-pre2982 on debian squeeze and it
> generally worked, but specifically:
> * i compiled it in a amd64 squeeze pbuilder chroot (in a lenny
> guest) * i used "make deb-pkg" [1] instead of make-kpkg [2],
> because from my research [3] kernel-package doesn't support
> linux >= 3.0 * the linux-image package was tested on a minimal
> amd64 squeeze in virtualbox * initramfs-tools built me a
> working initrd with "MODULES=most" * testme.sh and "vserver ...
> start" failed until i disabled CONFIG_USER_NS [4]
yep, that is an unfortunate mainline bug/feature which will
probably be _the_ main issue in the next few months when
switching from 2.6.38.x (or earlier) to 3.0 ...
unfortunately there is no easy way to disable this from
the patch, except for completely removing that option, but
maybe that's what we'll do for the time being ...
thanks,
Herbert
> [1]
> http://kernel-handbook.alioth.debian.org/ch-common-tasks.html#s-kernel-org-package,
> specifically "make -j4 KDEB_PKGVERSION=squeeze1 INSTALL_MOD_STRIP=1 deb-pkg"
> [2] http://www.debian.org/doc/FAQ/ch-kernel.en.html#s-customkernel
> [3] http://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2011/08/msg00144.html
> [4] http://irc.13thfloor.at/LOG/2011-08/LOG_2011-08-03.txt
> again, i'm not voting for 3.0.y (unless it gets longterm support), but
> simply sharing my findings of successfully compiling and testing 3.0.1 with
> debian squeeze.
> corey
> --
> undefined@pobox.com
>> and i'm pitching in $100 USD, not for stabilizing any specific kernel version
>> (though i've voiced my opinion above and would like to see ipv6 support match
>> ipv4), but to support future linux-vserver and util-vserver development in
>> general. (herbert, just tell me how to get it to you from the usa.)
>> corey
>> --
>> undefined@pobox.com
>>> best,
>>> Herbert
>>>> note that whatever kernel we choose, the stabilization
>>>> will be for that kernel only, i.e. there is no way to
>>>> port such a kernel to the other branch (without need
>>>> to redo all the testing and review)
>>>> please share your thoughts and preferences in this
>>>> thread so that we get an idea where we are heading to
>>>> thanks in advance,
>>>> Herbert
Received on Sun Aug 7 14:00:29 2011