On Sat, Feb 21, 2004 at 08:18:00PM +0100, Thomas Gelf wrote: > Compiling Kernel 2.6.3 with vs0.08 on Debian fails, the error is: > > > fs/builtin.o: In function `load_aout_binary`: > > fs/builtin.o(.text+0x275dc): undefined reference to `vx_rsspages_sub` > > make[1]... > > Any idea? This seems similar to > http://list.linux-vserver.org/archive/vserver/msg06189.html > but herbert's "switch ((long)filp->f_pos) {" is present in the vs0.08 patch.
probably something else, could you provide your .config file? > And what do you think about using Kernel 2.6 with Vserver on Hosting > Servers "in the wild"? I have running it since 2.6.0 on a customer's > hosting server as he absolutely wanted to do so and I'm using it on > some fileservers (lvm2, raid, sata, scsi, netatalk, samba3... - running > on mandrake without any problems, serving files to os8, os9, osX, w2k...) > > Kernel 2.6 seems to be very stable - what about the Vserver patches? guess they are at least as 'stable' as the 2.6 kernel ... ;) > We would like to start our first two Vserver machines (P4 HT 2.6GHz, > 2GB, 2x120GB SATA each) near the end of the next week and migrate some > UML Servers to them. I have to come to a decision: Kernel 2.4.25_vs1.26 > or Kernel 2.6.3_vs0.08 - what is your opinion? Any experiences? > > Cheers, > Thomas > > N.B.: Herbert, don't be angry with me, but your homepage IS a little bit > confusing. I wasn't able to find out if the Quota Hashes (and per context > disk limits) are included in the vs0.08 patch. The two links on why should I be angry, sometimes it confuses me too ;) (but at least access is allowed, and not forbidden ;) > http://www.13thfloor.at/vserver/e_patches/overview/ suggests this as they > point to the same destination, is this true? We have had no chance to find > it out by ourselves as all the 2.6.x kernels we tried out didn't compile > with vs0.0x on Debian - but in the kernel configuration we didn't find any > hints on quota hashes like in kernel 2.4.x the quota hashes and context quota/disk limits are not ported to 2.6 yet, but I guess, if there is demand and somebody interested in testing it, patches might be a logical consequence ... HTH, Herbert > -- > Thomas Gelf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > _______________________________________________ > Vserver mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://list.linux-vserver.org/mailman/listinfo/vserver _______________________________________________ Vserver mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://list.linux-vserver.org/mailman/listinfo/vserver
