On Thu, Jan 07, 2010 at 01:04:39PM -0500, Paul Kyzivat wrote: > Hello - this is my first time posting here. > The project I am working on is currently using: > - kernel 2.6.22.10 > - patch-2.6.22.10-vs2.2.0.5.diff > That is working for us, but now we want to have support for IPv6 in the > guests. I am trying to decide the most practical way to get there. > At the moment, the most straightforward path seems to be: > - kernel 2.6.22.19 > - patch-2.6.22.19-vs2.3.0.34.diff > We are seriously considering that. But some of our people are > concerned that we might have migration issues to deal with, or at > least extra testing if we go that way, and are desirous of a more > minimalist change. > (We had previously been using patch-2.6.14.3-vs2.01.diff. When > we migrated to patch-2.6.22.10-vs2.2.0.5.diff some of our guests > encountered incompatibilities that we didn't discover until after > the fact. just curious, what were the incompatibilities you discovered? > That is making people gun shy. There is also some concern over > switching from a "stable" release to a "development" release.) actually it is an experimental release :) > So I've also been investigating the possibility of adding the IPv6 > capabilities to the vserver version we have. I see that was done for > some vserver versions via additional patches from: > http://people.linux-vserver.org/~bonbons/ipv6/ > But there isn't such a patch for our kernel/vserver combination. > I also note some discussion on your mailing list here that you > are getting ready to release a new *stable* vs release. we are on the verge to a devel release, which will be the basis for further stabilization and testing which should ultimately result in a new stable release, but there are quite some things to do till then, and till now the interest in helping with testing is quite low, so it might take a while ... > Depending on when that is to be available, maybe we should be > considering that one too. you might consider a recent 2.6.31/32 kernel and patch as it will be the basis for that upcoming stable, and simply switch to that stable version once it is available > I have some questions whose answers should help decide among the > possibilities: > - Is there a way to determine what user impacting changes there > are between the version we are on and some newer version, say > patch-2.6.22.19-vs2.3.0.34.diff? that's not really 'newer' it is just a different branch, same kernel/time .... > (I have looked at the change logs, but I can't easily extrapolate > how those changes would affect existing user code.) most likely there are no effects at all > - Would it make *any* sense to try porting one of the IPv6 patches > to vs2.2.0.5??? not really, but feel free to do so if you like :) > - When do you expect to release the next stable version? when it's ready ... feel free to speed that up by donations or contributions (mostly time or resources) > - What kernels with that next stable version support? most likely 2.6.31+ > - How will this stable version differ from vs2.3.0.34? it will be thoroughly tested, have full CFS integration and no known bugs :) HTH, Herbert > Thanks, > Paul (Kyzivat)