On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 02:03:36PM +0200, Daniel Hokka Zakrisson wrote: > > Yes, that has been my first approach, but coming from a 'normal' Debian > > version this gives all sorts of warnings and error messages about files, > > links and directories. > Such as? Thsi has nothing to do with my initial mail as I messed up the package generation there leading me to my strange path. I did it the right way now and it looks quite ok. There would not be any errors if I just purged the Debian-provided util-vserver. I'd like to be able to just update to your version, though. The messages are attached. I think it should be easy to fix by stating the resulting various deb-files replace util-vserver. > I never want packages touching my data, or even looking at my data. > Then again, I am vehemently opposed to packages asking questions... If I recall it right, RPMs are not allowed to ask questions opposed to DEBs, which should ask the right questions to do the configuration according to the level of question-hassle you demanded via debconf priority. In this case I don't care as long as nothing deletes my /ect/vserver-stuff. > Yes, don't just upgrade, unless you spend time on figuring out how to do > so properly. The packages are meant to replace a from-source install, > since nobody really should be using the Debian-packages. I'd say 90% starting with Debian and VServers use the Debian-version. And depending on your requirements it might just be fine. Even the horribly broken 2.6.26-Debian-VServer-Kernel works fine in most cases where I use VServers. This is why I would really like to see teh packages to be able to replace Debian util-vserver and I think they are able to. > The util-vserver and vprocunhide initscripts are orthogonal. > vservers-default on the other hand, depends on them both. They're all > set to get activated in postinst, so if you figure out why it didn't > work for you... Probably it failed due to my messed up package generation. > > Described that above. And as it initially failed I didn't do many tests > > as in the thread "[vserver] is default squeeze kernel and util-vserver > > ok?" Ben stated "Getting from utils-vserver-basic-debian to util-vserver > > is not pleasant". Perhaps I had just let myself be scared away to easily. > That is a completely different package. Yes, it is. They just made me believe there are general issues preventing one to migrate from Debian-provided to original util-vserver leading to loss of data and other nasty things. By now I think it would just be fine to use the packages instead of teh Debian ones, possibly even symlinking /var/lib/vservers to /vservers as long as I make sure the --barrier is at the right spot. Regards, Adrian -- LiHAS - Adrian Reyer - Hessenwiesenstraße 10 - D-70565 Stuttgart Fon: +49 (7 11) 78 28 50 90 - Fax: +49 (7 11) 78 28 50 91 Mail: lihas@lihas.de - Web: http://lihas.de Linux, Netzwerke, Consulting & Support - USt-ID: DE 227 816 626 Stuttgart