Re: [alpine-devel] alpine 2.6.0_rc1 is out - what do do with scst and vserver isos
On Wednesday, May 01, 2013 08:26:08 PM Natanael Copa wrote:
> On Wed, 1 May 2013 19:24:55 +0530
> "V.Krishn" <vkrishn4_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Alternatives:
> > > 1) we kill it and tell users to use LXC
> > > 2) we ship it with an old kernel
> > >
> > > 2.1) downgrade to LTS 3.4.y
> > > 2.2) do nothing, keep the current, outdated 3.6.y
> > > 2.3) we try port vserver to 3.9 or same as grsec.
> > Can we have a little insight on VServer / LXC:
> > 1. Which is stable and actively developed.
> stable: vserver
> (very) actively developed: LXC
> > 2. Which relatively uses more of recent kernels new advancements.
> > 3. Does adding LXC to alpine also require patches like VServer does.
> No. LXC is in mainline kernel. Vserver requires patching. This is main
> reason why we want move to LXC in the long run.
> > 4. For 2.3 above - efforts involved.
> i think for now I would have to do the porting myself. I don't know how
> much work it is. It might be fairly straighfroward, it might be very messy
> (i expect the latter due to namespace improvements in recent kernels)
I would suggest to put the effort to moving more wanted features like zfs to
> > 5. Migration issues.
> Migration does not need to be very difficult. I think it it should be
> relatively easy to make a migration script that takes the vserver config
> and converts it to LXC.
then LXC :-)
> > > I also don't think there are many vserver users that wants the new
> > > fancy stuff in newer kernels, so i think reverting to an older 3.4.y
> > > kernel might work. Sticking to LTS kernels saves us for much work.
> > Will this be same for coming Alpine releases ?
> This would only be for vserver kernel for now. And if we go this route, it
> will be what we do with alpine-vserver as long as we maintain it. (1-1.5
> years ahead)
> Basically, I think nobody should set up any new vserver hosts. The alpine
> releases would only be for maintaining the existing servers.
> Hm. Maybe we should just kill alpine-vserver isos now, and tell vserver
> users to stick to alpine-vserver-2.4.y, which we then maintain for as long
> as needed? (1 year more). It means we will spit out new v2.4 releases for
> another year.
If point 2.1 is not much work, release with 3.4x (ltsi) with NOTE of being
discontinued with coming release+1.
Discontinuing the current alpine-vserver without a prior note does not seem
> The vserver hosts will not get any of the new features, but those are
> supposed to be as minimal as possible anyways...
Received on Wed May 01 2013 - 20:35:17 UTC