Enrico Scholz wrote:
> Herbert Poetzl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>>what if we implement the _syscall3 for all known platforms
>>in a proper way, and feed them back to glibc/kernel headers
>>as well as integrate them into dietlibc and/or util-vserver?
>
>
> The kernel (resp. projects like [1]
On Mon, Apr 11, 2005 at 10:13:15PM +0200, Ehab Heikal wrote:
> Cool now it will be called stable.
> I have one question, is virtual networking like with freevps doable?
define virtual networking ...
> Or is it not there yet or not planned.
something similar (but with minimal overhead) is
imple
Cool now it will be called stable.
I have one question, is virtual networking like with freevps doable? Or
is it not there yet or not planned.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ehab Heikal
Sent: Monday, April 11, 2005 1:44 PM
To: vserver@lis
On Mon, Apr 11, 2005 at 01:55:44PM -0400, Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote:
>
> Excellent! Is NG going to be part of it?
no, we decided against that for the 2.0 branch which
will allow us to put it into 2.1 immediately after
2.0 is out/done ... so anybody interested in those
new features will
Excellent! Is NG going to be part of it?
Grisha
On Mon, 11 Apr 2005, Herbert Poetzl wrote:
Greetings Folks!
we had a longer discussion last night and we came to
the conclusion that this is the right time to start
working on a stable 2.0 release (for 2.6.x)
so while this will involve a lot of work a
Greetings Folks!
we had a longer discussion last night and we came to
the conclusion that this is the right time to start
working on a stable 2.0 release (for 2.6.x)
so while this will involve a lot of work and testing
in various places this also means that there will
be some kind of feature fre
On Mon, Apr 11, 2005 at 05:37:42PM +0200, Enrico Scholz wrote:
> Herbert Poetzl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> >> I guess it was using _syscall3() instead of syscall().
> >> ...
> >> To clearify things:
> >>
> >> util-vserver prefers to use _syscall3() (which is called 'fast'
> >> syscall inv
Herbert Poetzl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >> I guess it was using _syscall3() instead of syscall().
>> ...
>> To clearify things:
>>
>> util-vserver prefers to use _syscall3() (which is called 'fast'
>> syscall invocation method in the ./configure output) when it is
>> available. _syscall3()
Hi,
yes this Problem is on the 32bit system, with 32bit kernel nothing now on
64bit.
This Test is on a Pentium III (Coppermine) System. with Suse 9.2 Kernel
2.6.11.5-vs1.9.5 with the latest Utilities.
Currently it work now... but your test.sh dropped the same error.
But now i can login into my
On Mon, Apr 11, 2005 at 12:56:57PM +0200, Dennis Paulisch wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> another Problem when I start:
> /etc/init.d/vprocunhide start
>
> I got many errors like this Ones:
you sure you are using proper tools 64bit on 64bit kernel
and 32bit on 32bit kernel? looks the the not yet
implemente
On Mon, Apr 11, 2005 at 01:43:50PM +0200, Ehab Heikal wrote:
> I am confused, if it is stable why is the 1.9 branch called development.
probably because 'our' standards are somewhat higher,
and we prefer to call it development as long as we are not
damn sure that it is rock solid ...
(the 2.0 bra
On Mon, Apr 11, 2005 at 01:48:59PM +0200, Enrico Scholz wrote:
> Herbert Poetzl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> > no, thanks I already figured it, the dietlibc needs
> >> > patching as the syscall(2) for x86_64 isn't implemented
> >> >
> >> > .o( I wonder _what_ is running on your machine ;)
>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stephen Frost) writes:
>> >> according to Enrico (please confirm or correct) the glibc
>> >> has issues with the fake name resolver and is generally
>> >> considered insecure because usually dynamically linked ...
>> >
>> > This really needs further explanation and justification
Herbert Poetzl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> > no, thanks I already figured it, the dietlibc needs
>> > patching as the syscall(2) for x86_64 isn't implemented
>> >
>> > .o( I wonder _what_ is running on your machine ;)
>>
>> I guess it was using _syscall3() instead of syscall(). Shouldn't it?
I am confused, if it is stable why is the 1.9 branch called development.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Arne
Blankerts
Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2005 2:27 PM
To: vserver@list.linux-vserver.org
Subject: RE: [Vserver] Kernel 2.6.11.5 Problem
Hi,
another Problem when I start:
/etc/init.d/vprocunhide start
I got many errors like this Ones:
...
...
..
.
/proc/net/rt6_stats: No such file or directory
/proc/net/ipv6_route: No such file or directory
/proc/net/if_inet6: No such file or directory
/proc/net/anycast6: No such file or dire
16 matches
Mail list logo
