* Kilian Krause ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
well, it doesn't forcibly re-activate them. Just update-rc.d has a logic
that when *NONE* of the runlevels has any symlink for either
S??$SERVICENAME or K??$SERVICENAME then it'll try to create them for
it's thinking it's being installed for the first
Hi Enrico,
Am Dienstag, den 28.12.2004, 03:49 +0100 schrieb Enrico Scholz:
[ ... util-vserver.spec ...]
Sounds like maybe it shouldn't be shipped in the release tarball
then..
No, it must be shipped. Else 'rpmbuild -ta util-vserver...tar.bz2' would
not work anymore.
Hrmpf.
Hi Herbert,
Am Mittwoch, den 29.12.2004, 00:01 +0100 schrieb Herbert Poetzl:
chkconfig --del network
and it removes all the links from the various runlevels
so that 'network' isn't started anymore ...
The problem is that as soon as the next update to the network
package
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kilian Krause) writes:
[ ... util-vserver.spec ...]
Hrmpf. Then can we just not delete it in make clean?
I will think about this; but I still do not understand the problem
there.
very easy to tell. You're talking about what configure builds, make
clean purges yet
Herbert Poetzl [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, Dec 27, 2004 at 09:05:21PM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
* Herbert Poetzl ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On Mon, Dec 27, 2004 at 08:48:43PM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
syslogd and klogd are seperate packages already, the problem is that
klogd
* Enrico Scholz ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stephen Frost) writes:
So, it's used by scripts *and* is compiled into programs?
Yes; e.g.
I believed you, I just find it kind of ugly. :)
I'm thinking it might go in /usr/share/util-vserver then, since it's
not
* Herbert Poetzl ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On Mon, Dec 27, 2004 at 09:05:21PM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
Again, a Debian util-vserver package couldn't do that due to sane policy
issues. It'd be nice if we didn't have to worry about it because the
kernel/vserver patch took care of it, but
* Hans Ulrich Niedermann ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
And you can even do that disabling cleanly and automatically if you
install your guest systems with a virtual klogd instead of the
standard one which contains nothing but
Provides: linux-kernel-log-daemon
Conflicts:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stephen Frost) writes:
[... absolute paths vs. resolution with $PATH ...]
using execvp(3) would mean:
* trusting in $PATH that it contains the wanted path (this has to deal
with packaging philosophies also which expect all 3rd party apps
under /opt/name) --
On Tue, Dec 28, 2004 at 05:23:18PM +0100, Enrico Scholz wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stephen Frost) writes:
[... absolute paths vs. resolution with $PATH ...]
using execvp(3) would mean:
* trusting in $PATH that it contains the wanted path (this has to deal
with packaging philosophies
On Tue, Dec 28, 2004 at 11:23:03AM +0100, Hans Ulrich Niedermann wrote:
Herbert Poetzl [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, Dec 27, 2004 at 09:05:21PM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
* Herbert Poetzl ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On Mon, Dec 27, 2004 at 08:48:43PM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
Herbert Poetzl [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, Dec 28, 2004 at 11:23:03AM +0100, Hans Ulrich Niedermann wrote:
[ Vserver guest systems are different from normal systems, and thus
require special handling services for klogd and hardware access.
Herbert Poetzl says just disable the services
On Tue, Dec 28, 2004 at 08:08:34PM +0100, Hans Ulrich Niedermann wrote:
Herbert Poetzl [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, Dec 28, 2004 at 11:23:03AM +0100, Hans Ulrich Niedermann wrote:
[ Vserver guest systems are different from normal systems, and thus
require special handling services
* Kilian Krause ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
We'd appreciate if you could go through the TODO and help us with the
open questions.
Just as another (very) interested Debian developer-
The graphviz stuff sounds new, I don't recall seeing it when I did
0.30.195.. In general I'd say either remove
* Herbert Poetzl ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
|- How should the packaging devide up the groups most conveniently?
util-vserver-0.30.196
util-vserver-lib-0.30.196
util-vserver-sysv-0.30.196
util-vserver-core-0.30.196
util-vserver-build-0.30.196
util-vserver-legacy-0.30.196
Good grief,
* Kilian Krause ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
util-vserver-0.30.196
util-vserver-lib-0.30.196
util-vserver-sysv-0.30.196
util-vserver-core-0.30.196
util-vserver-build-0.30.196
util-vserver-legacy-0.30.196
ok, we'll try to bring that to the debs. Is there a list which files
should go
* Enrico Scholz ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Herbert Poetzl) writes:
| * A lot of programs don't have documentation. Add man pages in DocBook?
Maintainership of the man-pages will be a problem; especially in
the current stage where features might be added or removed very
Hi Enrico,
| * /etc/vserver/util-vserver-vars
Please do not install 'util-vserver-vars' into /etc. There is nothing
which can be changed at runtime across the entire toolset (binaries have
the values statically compiled in). The file is badly named and should
be called
hi Stephen,
Am Montag, den 27.12.2004, 08:49 -0500 schrieb Stephen Frost:
* Kilian Krause ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
We'd appreciate if you could go through the TODO and help us with the
open questions.
Just as another (very) interested Debian developer-
welcome to the troups. Feel free
Hi Stephen,
| * pkglibdir is /usr/lib/util-vserver instead of /var/lib/util-vserver
??? this is standard in autoconf packages.
I was wondering a bit about this myself.. The difference between
/usr/lib and /var/lib is pretty clear- is there stuff in util-vserver
that modifies things
Stephen Frost said:
As I mentioned in the other thread- please don't. It doesn't make sense
and it's really not a sane thing to do for Debian.
It just makes it more complex, with no real benefit.
I would reccomend keeping it the same 2 packages.
--
Luke Computer Science System Administrator
* Kilian Krause ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
| * pkglibdir is /usr/lib/util-vserver instead of /var/lib/util-vserver
??? this is standard in autoconf packages.
I was wondering a bit about this myself.. The difference between
/usr/lib and /var/lib is pretty clear- is there stuff in
On Mon, Dec 27, 2004 at 04:26:45PM +0100, Kilian Krause wrote:
Hi Enrico,
| * /etc/vserver/util-vserver-vars
Please do not install 'util-vserver-vars' into /etc. There is nothing
which can be changed at runtime across the entire toolset (binaries have
the values statically compiled
* Herbert Poetzl ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On Mon, Dec 27, 2004 at 04:26:45PM +0100, Kilian Krause wrote:
Has so far only _one_ app been coded outside the util-vserver domain? If
not, i'd vote for leaving this out until someone complains.
hmm, well, the thing here is that we _should_ try
Hello
On Mon, Dec 27, 2004 at 08:57:09AM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
* Herbert Poetzl ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
|- How should the packaging devide up the groups most conveniently?
util-vserver-0.30.196
util-vserver-lib-0.30.196
util-vserver-sysv-0.30.196
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kilian Krause) writes:
| * /etc/vserver/util-vserver-vars
Please do not install 'util-vserver-vars' into /etc.
...
Yet the option to allow a relocation of the default vserver rootdir
would be highly appreciated. (and IMHO broken if not availble at all)
The default
Stephen Frost [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
* Enrico Scholz ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Herbert Poetzl) writes:
| * A lot of programs don't have documentation. Add man pages in DocBook?
Maintainership of the man-pages will be a problem; especially in
the current stage where
Stephen Frost [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Just as another (very) interested Debian developer-
The graphviz stuff sounds new, I don't recall seeing it when I did
0.30.195.. In general I'd say either remove it or use something free to
build it.
graphviz is used by doxygen while building the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stephen Frost) writes:
| * pkglibdir is /usr/lib/util-vserver instead of /var/lib/util-vserver
??? this is standard in autoconf packages.
I was wondering a bit about this myself.. The difference between
/usr/lib and /var/lib is pretty clear- is there stuff in
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Herbert Poetzl) writes:
As there is some discussion about the package-count let me explain the
background of the packaging:
|- How should the packaging devide up the groups most conveniently?
util-vserver-core-0.30.196
Contains low-level utilities which use the
Hi Enrico,
Am Montag, den 27.12.2004, 23:02 +0100 schrieb Enrico Scholz:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kilian Krause) writes:
| * /etc/vserver/util-vserver-vars
Please do not install 'util-vserver-vars' into /etc.
...
Yet the option to allow a relocation of the default vserver rootdir
* Enrico Scholz ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stephen Frost) writes:
and that it perhaps shouldn't even be packaged at all
No, things like $PACKAGE_VERSION are changing with every version and
must be told to the single scripts. Same holds for the configured paths.
So, it's
* Kilian Krause ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Am Montag, den 27.12.2004, 23:02 +0100 schrieb Enrico Scholz:
Root-directory of existing vservers is /etc/vservers/.../vdir and the
location for newly created vservers is based on
/etc/vservers/.defaults/vdirbase.
thanks for the pointer. Sounds
* Hans Ulrich Niedermann ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Stephen Frost [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Putting the legacy stuff into a separate legacy package would
help new users a lot by reducing confusion as to what is legacy and
what is not.
Alright, then maybe a -legacy or some such package, or
On Mon, Dec 27, 2004 at 08:16:54PM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
* Enrico Scholz ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stephen Frost) writes:
and that it perhaps shouldn't even be packaged at all
No, things like $PACKAGE_VERSION are changing with every version and
must be told
* Herbert Poetzl ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On Mon, Dec 27, 2004 at 08:16:54PM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
Not entirely sure what to tell you about vshelper and being called by
the kernel... That's just an odd situation. :) Is there any
environment at that point, coming from *somewhere*?
* Herbert Poetzl ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On Mon, Dec 27, 2004 at 08:28:45PM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
Alright, then maybe a -legacy or some such package, or just a really
stern warning at the start of all the -legacy stuff saying this is
legacy, you shouldn't be using it, or just don't
* Herbert Poetzl ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On Mon, Dec 27, 2004 at 08:38:10PM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
Ah, interesting... That means anything that's needed by vshelper that's
not in those paths on most systems is a candidate for being hard-coded.
Does much fall into this category?
On Mon, Dec 27, 2004 at 08:48:43PM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
* Herbert Poetzl ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On Mon, Dec 27, 2004 at 08:28:45PM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
Alright, then maybe a -legacy or some such package, or just a really
stern warning at the start of all the -legacy
* Herbert Poetzl ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On Mon, Dec 27, 2004 at 08:48:43PM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
Perhaps, I just don't like releasing legacy tools. How difficult is it
to move to the new tools? Are the 'new' vservers the 2.6 ones, and the
'old' vservers the 2.4 ones, or can you
On Mon, Dec 27, 2004 at 09:05:21PM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
* Herbert Poetzl ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On Mon, Dec 27, 2004 at 08:48:43PM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
Perhaps, I just don't like releasing legacy tools. How difficult is it
to move to the new tools? Are the 'new'
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stephen Frost) writes:
Alright, then maybe a -legacy or some such package, or just a really
stern warning at the start of all the -legacy stuff saying this is
legacy, you shouldn't be using it, or just don't distribute it at all
(my personal favorite).
the thing is,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stephen Frost) writes:
and that it perhaps shouldn't even be packaged at all
No, things like $PACKAGE_VERSION are changing with every version and
must be told to the single scripts. Same holds for the configured paths.
So, it's used by scripts *and* is compiled into
Hi Enrico,
Hans Ulrich Niedermann and me have started reviewing the debian package
and put up some agenda we think should be clarified to ease packaging
(not only on Debian).
The TODO file with our questions can be found at
http://backend.verfaction.de/~kk/util-vserver/TODO alongside with
On Mon, Dec 27, 2004 at 02:36:24AM +0100, Kilian Krause wrote:
Hi Enrico,
Hans Ulrich Niedermann and me have started reviewing the debian package
and put up some agenda we think should be clarified to ease packaging
(not only on Debian).
The TODO file with our questions can be found at
Re,
-(snip)-
rebootmanager is obsoleted since a long time
(it was replaced by vshelper)
ok, fine. yet the make install or make install-distribution does still
yield it. That's nothing i would copy within the debian/rules.
|- How should the packaging devide up the groups most
46 matches
Mail list logo
