Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2010 11:02:58 +0200
From: Jon Clausen <alpine@ymmv.dk>
To: alpine-devel@lists.alpinelinux.org
Subject: Re: [alpine-devel] i486 vserver kernel?
Message-ID: <20101007090257.GA2467@nx8220.ymmv.dk>
References: <20101004110235.GG2458@nx8220.ymmv.dk>
 <1286197843.28650.61.camel@ncopa-desktop.nor.wtbts.net>
 <20101006150135.GB2482@nx8220.ymmv.dk>
 <1286439953.1540.12.camel@ncopa-desktop.nor.wtbts.net>
Precedence: list
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1286439953.1540.12.camel@ncopa-desktop.nor.wtbts.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)

On Thu, 07 Oct, 2010 at 10:25:53 +0200, Natanael Copa wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-10-06 at 17:01 +0200, Jon Clausen wrote:
> > On Mon, 04 Oct, 2010 at 15:10:43 +0200, Natanael Copa wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2010-10-04 at 13:02 +0200, Jon Clausen wrote: 
> ...
> > Actually I was thinking more in terms of kernel 'flavours' or
> > 'architechtures'. People with newer HW might be better off (as in get better
> > performance) with i586 or i686 kernels.
> 
> we use the term "flavor" for the patchsets. linux-grsec, linux-vserver.

ok

> > Is it feasible to introduce multiple builds? Sort of:
> > 
> > linux-vserver-i486-2.6.32.24-r0.apk
> > linux-vserver-i586-2.6.32.24-r0.apk
> 
> This would be the best, yes. Unfortunally it would require some extra
> maintenence work. How about 3rd party modules? dahdli-linux-vserver for
> instance. I also does a quick test to verify that the kernel actually
> boot in a virtual machine before I push the change. Should I test both
> i486 and i586? The biggest issue is that those things are not a one-time
> job and currently I'm pretty much at the limit of what I can maintain.

Yeah, I kinda figured it'd be something like that, so until someone comes
along with reasons to switch back to i586/i686 I'm happy :)

If/when someone does, then I'm just going to have to look into setting up a
build system.

> I am also planning to do alpine x86_64 soonish and I think most high-end
> vserver hosts will be using that,

This is good news. I'm sure you're right about high-end, but I think even
comparatively low-end as well.

> so I'm not that keen on start with
> linux-vserver-i486, linux-vserver-i586, linux-vserver-i686 for the time
> beeing.

Understandable.

regards,
jon
-- 
YMMV


---
Unsubscribe:  alpine-devel+unsubscribe@lists.alpinelinux.org
Help:         alpine-devel+help@lists.alpinelinux.org
---