Hello I know that this thread is old but I have to answer as I'm the maintainer.
On Tue, Nov 09, 2004 at 03:53:42PM +0100, Björn Steinbrink wrote: > On Tue, 9 Nov 2004 14:35:18 +0000 (UTC) > Jesper Krogh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I gmane.linux.vserver, skrev Herbert Poetzl: > > > On Tue, Nov 09, 2004 at 08:40:09AM +0000, Jesper Krogh wrote: > > > > I gmane.linux.vserver, skrev Dariush Pietrzak: > > > > > > I'd really like to test this vserver thing out, but currently > > > > > > it clashes with my policy of only installing things through > > > > > > the packages system on my computers. > > > > > > well, either you start building packages for your > > > package system, you rethink your policy, or you > > > choose not to test 'this vserver thing' ... > > > > Sure.. I'll go that way. I'd just like to know if the were available > > somewhere, so I could skip kernel compilation. > > > > > > I tried make-kpkg yesterday with the debian-kernel 2.6.9 source > > > > and vserver patch, that actually worked, (in regards to vserver) > > > > but failed getting pcmcia/wireless to work. > > > > > > well, debian source is debian source, linux-vserver > > > patches are based on the vanilla kernel not on some > > > distro kernel ... > > > > Ok.. so I'll go for the vanilla kernel in the next try. > > > > > > I'd really like to have a couple of vservers at my laptop for > > > > testing software installations :-) Isn't this a common usage of > > > > Vservers? > > > > > > yes, it is also common practice to avoid debian > > > to get a working linux-vserver setup ... > > > > For any particular reason? > > Because debian packages are made to work with debian packages. That > means that if you use the debian util-vserver package it is best to use > their kernel patch and their helper stuff, it won't work too well with > non debianized stuff. Problem is: debian stuff is often outdated, f.e. > from what i remember debian has an (old) vserver patch for 2.6 (devel), > but the tools are kept at 0.30 (stable), thus you can't use the new > features (except if the debian maintainers wrote/backported tools...). I would like to say like this: Debian tend to ship well tested and stable versions. The kernel patch for 2.6 kernel was an experiment and I actually think it was a bad idéa to add it there. I have got many misunderstandings about this version. > Also, since some packages have very little in common with the upstream, > it's a real pain to fix issues if you don't happen to be the debian > maintainer. Patches are always welcome! > You should have a look at the list's > archives and search for message from/to debian maintainers, maybe that > helps understanding why, for linux-vserver, the debianized stuff is not > the first choice. I would like to tell that util-vserver on 2.4 is very well tested. The reason why the 2.6 version is not included in Debian is that is is not stable (still development as far as I know). > That said, i want to say that i've used debian a long time and i like > it, but sometimes their (or a maintainer's, dunno) packaging policies > don't fit a project very well. Linux-VServer is such a project as it > seems. Well I do not really see your problem here. If you want to use development branch you have to use it from upstream. Stable versions is what is intended for release, or do I misunderstand something here? Regards, // Ola > Bjoern > _______________________________________________ > Vserver mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://list.linux-vserver.org/mailman/listinfo/vserver > -- --------------------- Ola Lundqvist --------------------------- / [EMAIL PROTECTED] Annebergsslingan 37 \ | [EMAIL PROTECTED] 654 65 KARLSTAD | | +46 (0)54-10 14 30 +46 (0)70-332 1551 | | http://www.opal.dhs.org UIN/icq: 4912500 | \ gpg/f.p.: 7090 A92B 18FE 7994 0C36 4FE4 18A1 B1CF 0FE5 3DD9 / --------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ Vserver mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://list.linux-vserver.org/mailman/listinfo/vserver