From: Alex Lyashkov (shadow_at_psoft.net)
Date: Fri 30 Jan 2004 - 09:27:54 GMT
On Friday 30 January 2004 01:13, Herbert Poetzl wrote:
> n Thu, Jan 29, 2004 at 04:34:00PM -0500, Igor Seletskiy wrote:
> > Hi Herbert,
> >
> > My name is Igor Seletskiy. I own psoft (maker of freeVPS). I wander what
> > are your thoughts about merging linux-vserver & freeVPS?
> > I believe at some points freeVPS is more advanced then linux-vserver
> > (like our new memory accounting module, new network routing, also, &
> > mount tables), on the other hand - I am pretty sure that there are bunch
> > of places where linux-vserver is more advanced.
> > I spun off freeVPS when Jacques virtually stopped releasing anything.
> > Yet, seeing how linux-vserver took off - I wander what your feelings are
> > about merging projects & working together.
>
> I always tried to keep contact to Alexey Lyashkov, who,
> if I'm not mistaken, started and maintains the vserver
> branch, now known as freeVPS (I wonder if that information
> is incomplete?)
first is request from PSoft about create vserver pachset for RH kernels.
>
> I'm forwarding this to the mailing list, because I think
> it is of interest for the community, and I hope you do not
> take this as a personal offense (which isn't intended).
>
> some facts (as I see them):
>
> - freeVPS has some features the current linux-vserver
> implementation lacks (memory, networking, ...)
>
> - freeVPS is limited to a certain kernel (RH 2.4.18)
> and distribution (RedHat 7.3) and I assume arch
> (i386) too
this kernel can be instaled to RH 8.0 and you know about it. not forget.
ask Matt.
I specialy not create patch for RH 9.0 because it been not supported in near
future.
Other RH kernels can be supported easy, but i use UML for kernel development
and last RH kernel not capability with it.
Also i don`t waste time for analyze changes in new kernel and merge to freevps
only security/stability fixes.
You remember many bugs in memory subsystem 2.4.23 ? i don`t have it FreeVPS.
About arch other then i386 - I have only one arch specific code in container.h
it can be ported easy to other platforms after request, but i see primary
using I386 arch.
> - the License of tools and kernel patches is not
> obvious to me, although kernel patches basically
> default to GPL
>
> - the changes freeVPS made to the RH kernel are very
> intrusive and might introduce various issues which
> need some reviewing and a lot of testing
>
> my opinion:
>
> I'm convinced that 'working together' in a well defined
> way, and even 'merging' various parts, provided that they
> are covered by an open and free license, could be very
> beneficial for both projects, but I currently do not see
> a simple way to do that (ideas welcome ;) ...
>
> That said, I'm not convinced that it can't be done, it
> just needs some work on both sides and especially some
> official statements from your side, what how and why
> psoft is/will be involved in this (well there is a
> commercial product H-Sphere, right?)
>
> btw, linux-vserver development is free, and as I said
> many times, patches are always welcome, so if your aim
> is to 'improve' the quality of a free linux-vserver
> implementation, publishing patches agains recent dev.
> versions would be a great way to do that ...
freevps also free :) release version and snapshots uploaded to
www.freevps.com and supported by my team :)
-- With best regards, Alex _______________________________________________ Vserver mailing list Vserver_at_list.linux-vserver.org http://list.linux-vserver.org/mailman/listinfo/vserver