On Tue, Oct 14, 2003 at 11:41:52AM -0400, Mike Savage wrote: > Hello all, > I hope everyone has been doing well. I have a question concerning vserver > ctx-17c. > > I have implemented vservers (2.4.20-ctx17) with multiple IP addresses > located on separate physical networks and several of our admins have > reported that traffic is not always moving out across the appropriate > adapters. From various posts to the vserver mailing list, I saw that > ctx-17a through ctx-17c fixed various networking "anomalies" :-) > > Because of driver issues, I need to stay at kernel 2.4.20, however I have > seen that ctx-17c is only available for 2.4.21 and 2.4.22. Here is what I > did: > > I took a virgin 2.4.21 tarball and exploded it into two separate trees. One > tree was patched with ctx-17, while the other was patched with ctx-17c. I > then create a patch from the diff of these two trees. Then on a 2.4.20 tree > that had been patched with ctx-17, I applied my new ctx-17 to ctx-17c diff. > I saw two hunks fail...one I was able to correct by hand (socket.c IIRC), > the other I was unable to fix...it was a hunk in udp.c (IIRC) that had to do > with ipv6, so I went on and ignored it because I do not use ipv6. My kernel > compiled correctly, I upgraded to vserver-23 tools and upon rebooting, my > system is up and running with 4 vservers. > > My question is this: Is what I did OK? Are the fixes that went into moving > from ctx-17c specific to major changes to the kernel while moving from > 2.4.20 to 2.4.21 and 2.4.22? Or are the ctx-17 to ctx-17c changes > applicable to 2.4.20 as well?
I would suggest to use c17f, which is available for 2.4.20 too ... get it at ... http://vserver.13thfloor.at/Stuff/split-2.4.20-c17f/ best, Herbert > Thank you. > > Mike
