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] [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