On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 10:17:30PM +0200, Gildas wrote: > 2008/8/13 Thomas Weber <l_vserver@mail2news.4t2.com>: > > Am Dienstag, den 12.08.2008, 20:35 +0200 schrieb Herbert Poetzl: > >> On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 10:00:16AM -0500, Adam Majer wrote: > >> > Remigiusz Modrzejewski wrote: > >> > > But in the end, it would invariably mean a lot of work, > >> > > swinging patches back and forth and convincing people that > >> > > you're right about this code. And it would probably end up > >> > > being accepted in less than 100%. Then, Herbert explicitly > >> > > stated that maintaining 80% in-tree and 20% out-tree is exactly > >> > > the thing he's trying to avoid... > >> > > > >> > > Anyways, you're welcome to try. And it would be a great thing > >> > > if you succeeded. > >> > > >> > 80% in-tree and 20% out-tree is much better than 100% out tree. > > > > I'd second this. > > With the growing interest in virtualization some project will sooner or > > later start pushing into the kernel tree. If it's not vserver it's > > openvz or something else. Anything that makes it into the main tree will > > probably make it much more difficult for the other projects to survive. > > People will just use what is 'in there' without patching. > > I myself am a happy vserver user for years, but with say openvz built > > into the kernel tree, i don't think i'd hesitate very long to switch. > > And i'm for sure not the only one. > > Hi, > > I can't resist to jump in the conversation at this point. > > I've been a happy user of vserver for years now for my personnal use > (and even donated my old alpha workstation), but it seems to me that > something is missing from this thread: there is already one os > virtualisation/jail/zone/container/vps project included in the linux > kernel. > > It's more or less called LXC (or "linux container" or "containers" or > cg or??), is based on the joined effort of the pre-existing projects > in the area and as far as I tell is the only way forward for the > inclusion mainstream. > > I know that Herbert has been commenting/posting a little on their > mailing list (as time permits I guess, the other devs there being > payed full time to do it) and I seem to understand that there are > plans to rebase some of the vserver userspace tools to use some > containers features. > > It seems to me that we are nearly in the same situation that existed > for ipsec not so long ago with freeswan being out-of-tree and > disappearing when some completely new code was written for ipsec > support in linux, with only part of the userspace code subsisting > along with raccoon/isakmpd and that kind of freaks me out. > > My question is simple though maybe a bit harsh: what future is left to > vservers? Does it makes sense to keep it as a separate project? What > does vservers support that is missing (or will be missing/absent) from > the container solution? Can it be merged? once the Linux-VServer functionality is completely covered by mainline kernels my job is done, and Linux-VServer will only remain as userspace tools (most likely util-vserver) maintained by Daniel or somebody else .... I have no problem with that whatsoever! :) > Hope this doesn't cause any ruffled feathers and won't wake up trolls, > this is far from being my intention. > > Regards, > Gildas