From: "V.Krishn" <vkrishn4@gmail.com>
Reply-To: vkrishn4@gmail.com
To: alpine-devel@lists.alpinelinux.org
Subject: Re: [alpine-devel] alpine 2.6.0_rc1 is out - what do do with scst and vserver isos
Date: Wed, 1 May 2013 19:24:55 +0530
User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.3.7-64; KDE/4.7.4; x86_64; ; )
References: <20130501142905.2661cf85@ncopa-desktop.alpinelinux.org>
In-Reply-To: <20130501142905.2661cf85@ncopa-desktop.alpinelinux.org>
Precedence: list
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201305011924.55832.vkrishn4@gmail.com>

On Wednesday, May 01, 2013 05:59:05 PM Natanael Copa wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I have uploaded the 2.6.0_rc1 isos.
> 
> I wonder if we can kill the alpine-scst iso now?
> 
> What do we do with alpine-vserver isos?
> 
> 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   2.2) do nothing, keep the current, outdated 3.6.y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.
> 
> Personally, I think I would prefer alternative 2.1. We still use
> vserver in production (build servers) and we don't have any good
> migration plan for vserver -> LXC.

Can we have a little insight on VServer / LXC:
1. Which is stable and actively developed.
2. Which relatively uses more of recent kernels new advancements.
3. Does adding LXC to alpine  also require patches like VServer does.
4. For 2.3 above - efforts involved.
5. Migration issues. 

> 
> 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 ?

-- 
Regards,
V.Krishn



---
Unsubscribe:  alpine-devel+unsubscribe@lists.alpinelinux.org
Help:         alpine-devel+help@lists.alpinelinux.org
---