On Wednesday 29 March 2006 16:14, Albert Shih wrote:
> Hi all
>
> Maybe very stupid question, but have a server running FC4 with
> vserver-patch kernel.
>
> I want launch two guest with same version of linux but I don't want make a
> big copy. How can I do that ?
>
I'm using unionfs (http://www
New Debian package (but for 2.6.16) ...
http://packages.debian.org/unstable/base/linux-image-vserver-amd64-k8
http://packages.debian.org/unstable/base/linux-image-2.6-vserver-amd64-k8
http://packages.debian.org/unstable/base/linux-image-2.6.16-1-vserver-amd64-k8
Linux kernel 2.6.16 image on AMD6
> There was some mail exchanges some month ago on the list between
> Enrico and Alberto about vhashify SIGSEGV on Debian x86_64. How did
> this end ? I seem to have the same problem:
Does 'make check' report errors for the hashcalc* tests? If so, somebody
with an x86_64 and Debian- and bee
Gerald Hochegger wrote:
ok - I'll try to package an ubuntu kernel with the vserver devel
patch also.
But I'm not able to upgrade the Ubuntu kernel with all Ubuntu
patches to 2.6.16 - I've to stick with the Ubuntu provided
2.6.15.6 kernel.
This leads back to the starting point of the thread.
> There was some mail exchanges some month ago on the list between
> Enrico and Alberto about vhashify SIGSEGV on Debian x86_64. How did
> this end ? I seem to have the same problem:
Does 'make check' report errors for the hashcalc* tests? If so, somebody
with an x86_64 and Debian- and beecrypt
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
hi
Timothy Arnold wrote:
> Just wondered if anyone has had any issues starting Qmail inside a vserver
> (2.0). I have a straight thing where Qmail will not start on "boot". The
> init script does run, but the daemons appear to crash. Once the vserver
On Thu, Mar 30, 2006 at 02:51:59AM +0200, Herbert Poetzl wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 30, 2006 at 12:08:29AM +0200, Gerald Hochegger wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 29, 2006 at 03:55:10PM +0200, Herbert Poetzl wrote:
> > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2006 at 12:15:05AM +0200, Gerald Hochegger wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Mar 28, 200
Hi,
Been running qmail-send, qmail-pop3d and qmail-smtpd under daemontools
inside a vserver and it works fine.
Init starts daemontools' svscan which in turns start the 3 qmail
services under /services.
My setup is mostly the same as the one described in Life With Qmail
(http://www.lifewithqmail.
Hi All,
Just wondered if anyone has had any issues starting Qmail inside a vserver
(2.0). I have a straight thing where Qmail will not start on "boot". The
init script does run, but the daemons appear to crash. Once the vserver
has started, I can login and run /etc/init.d/qmail start and it works.
On Thu, Mar 30, 2006 at 06:23:27PM +0100, Joel Soete wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> given the pb I encountered with ext3 (severall corruption at different places)
> with development vs release (2.1...) with this parisc kernel, I try to
> implement the stable one (2.0.2).
>
> Here are the results of test
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Herve Guillemet) writes:
> There was some mail exchanges some month ago on the list between
> Enrico and Alberto about vhashify SIGSEGV on Debian x86_64. How did
> this end ? I seem to have the same problem:
Does 'make check' report errors for the hashcalc* tests? If so, somebo
Hello all,
given the pb I encountered with ext3 (severall corruption at different places)
with development vs release (2.1...) with this parisc kernel, I try to
implement the stable one (2.0.2).
Here are the results of test:
Linux patst007 2.6.16-vs2.0.2-rc14-pa10-d32up #5 Thu Mar 30 17:30:05 CES
Le 29/03/2006 à 16:39:24+0200, Herbert Poetzl a écrit
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2006 at 04:14:11PM +0200, Albert Shih wrote:
> > Hi all
> >
> > Maybe very stupid question, but have a server running FC4 with
> > vserver-patch kernel.
> >
> > I want launch two guest with same version of linux but I don't
Boris Kolar wrote:
Daniel Hokka Zakrisson wrote:
Oliver Welter wrote:
this is more or less expected behaviour...
With recent patches, i.e. 2.0.2-rc11+ or 2.1.0+, you can also set the
persistent flag to keep the context around even after all processes die.
For util-vserver, this means adding
Daniel Hokka Zakrisson wrote:
> Oliver Welter wrote:
>> this is more or less expected behaviour...
> With recent patches, i.e. 2.0.2-rc11+ or 2.1.0+, you can also set the
> persistent flag to keep the context around even after all processes die.
> For util-vserver, this means adding ^38 to the flag
Hello,
There was some mail exchanges some month ago on the list between Enrico
and Alberto about vhashify SIGSEGV on Debian x86_64.
How did this end ? I seem to have the same problem:
Linux host 2.6.16-rc5-vs2.1.1-rc12 #3 SMP Thu Mar 16 15:59:40 CET 2006
x86_64 GNU/Linux
Debian Sarge host
16 matches
Mail list logo
