Hi,
On Monday 28 April 2008 18:59, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
VServer looks currently dead.
That is a pity. Is it a problem upstream or with the maintainer?
It's a gross simplification. vserver is not dead, they are lacking a bit
behind the latest kernel release, which is the only thing some
Hi Holger
Really good to know. I'm the (co-)maintainer of util-vserver so
I really want the vserver kernels to be maintained. :)
Best regards,
// Ola
On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 09:51:14AM +0200, Holger Levsen wrote:
Hi,
On Monday 28 April 2008 18:59, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
VServer looks
On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 09:51:14AM +0200, Holger Levsen wrote:
On Monday 28 April 2008 18:59, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
VServer looks currently dead.
That is a pity. Is it a problem upstream or with the maintainer?
It's a gross simplification. vserver is not dead, they are lacking a bit
As for mainstream integration, I can say OpenVZ is committed to merging
containers functionality to mainstream. I have just checked the number
of changesets submitted by OpenVZ and Linux-VServer guys, using
up-to-date Linus' kernel git tree. For the last 365 days (i.e. a year)
there were 818
On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 06:47:27PM +0400, Kir Kolyshkin wrote:
As for mainstream integration, I can say OpenVZ is committed to merging
containers functionality to mainstream. I have just checked the number
of changesets submitted by OpenVZ and Linux-VServer guys, using
up-to-date Linus'
On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 06:47:27PM +0400, Kir Kolyshkin wrote:
As for mainstream integration, I can say OpenVZ is committed to merging
containers functionality to mainstream. I have just checked the number
of changesets submitted by OpenVZ and Linux-VServer guys, using
up-to-date Linus'
Tue, 29 Apr 2008 18:47:27 +0400
Kir Kolyshkin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Also, IMHO the document
http://wiki.debian.org/DebianKernelPatchAcceptanceGuidelines is not
applicable to this case because it describes patches that are [not]
welcome to standard Debian kernel, while OpenVZ,
On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 05:20:06PM +0200, maximilian attems wrote:
indeed the openvz upstream merge record is fun to watch :)
IMHO the coding style of vserver is not up to upstream merge quality.
even if compared to xen we are quite happy about its etch bug count.
I just took a look into the
Hi Christian
On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 10:29:17AM -0300, Christian Lyra wrote:
Hi there,
Since we are talking about openvz and kernel, may I ask for a
linux-image-2.6.x-openvz package like Debian already has for xen and
vserver?
You are perfectly welcome to do so. I have actually
On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 05:47:20PM +0200, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
Since we are talking about openvz and kernel, may I ask for a
linux-image-2.6.x-openvz package like Debian already has for xen and
vserver?
VServer looks currently dead.
However it do not match the Debian Acceptance
Hi Bastian
On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 06:32:47PM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 05:47:20PM +0200, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
Since we are talking about openvz and kernel, may I ask for a
linux-image-2.6.x-openvz package like Debian already has for xen and
vserver?
11 matches
Mail list logo
