Re: [vserver] util-vserver 0.30.216-pre2967 for packaging for Debian

From: Adrian Reyer <>
Date: Mon 23 May 2011 - 15:26:31 BST
Message-ID: <>

On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 02:03:36PM +0200, Daniel Hokka Zakrisson wrote:
> > Yes, that has been my first approach, but coming from a 'normal' Debian
> > version this gives all sorts of warnings and error messages about files,
> > links and directories.
> Such as?

Thsi has nothing to do with my initial mail as I messed up the package
generation there leading me to my strange path.
I did it the right way now and it looks quite ok. There would not be any
errors if I just purged the Debian-provided util-vserver. I'd like to be
able to just update to your version, though. The messages are attached.
I think it should be easy to fix by stating the resulting various
deb-files replace util-vserver.

> I never want packages touching my data, or even looking at my data.
> Then again, I am vehemently opposed to packages asking questions...

If I recall it right, RPMs are not allowed to ask questions opposed to
DEBs, which should ask the right questions to do the configuration
according to the level of question-hassle you demanded via debconf
priority. In this case I don't care as long as nothing deletes my

> Yes, don't just upgrade, unless you spend time on figuring out how to do
> so properly. The packages are meant to replace a from-source install,
> since nobody really should be using the Debian-packages.

I'd say 90% starting with Debian and VServers use the Debian-version.
And depending on your requirements it might just be fine. Even the
horribly broken 2.6.26-Debian-VServer-Kernel works fine in most cases
where I use VServers. This is why I would really like to see teh
packages to be able to replace Debian util-vserver and I think they are
able to.

> The util-vserver and vprocunhide initscripts are orthogonal.
> vservers-default on the other hand, depends on them both. They're all
> set to get activated in postinst, so if you figure out why it didn't
> work for you...

Probably it failed due to my messed up package generation.

> > Described that above. And as it initially failed I didn't do many tests
> > as in the thread "[vserver] is default squeeze kernel and util-vserver
> > ok?" Ben stated "Getting from utils-vserver-basic-debian to util-vserver
> > is not pleasant". Perhaps I had just let myself be scared away to easily.
> That is a completely different package.

Yes, it is. They just made me believe there are general issues
preventing one to migrate from Debian-provided to original util-vserver
leading to loss of data and other nasty things.
By now I think it would just be fine to use the packages instead of teh
Debian ones, possibly even symlinking /var/lib/vservers to /vservers as
long as I make sure the --barrier is at the right spot.


LiHAS - Adrian Reyer - Hessenwiesenstra├če 10 - D-70565 Stuttgart
Fon: +49 (7 11) 78 28 50 90 - Fax:  +49 (7 11) 78 28 50 91
Mail: - Web:
Linux, Netzwerke, Consulting & Support - USt-ID: DE 227 816 626 Stuttgart
Received on Mon May 23 15:26:58 2011
[Next/Previous Months] [Main vserver Project Homepage] [Howto Subscribe/Unsubscribe] [Paul Sladen's vserver stuff]
Generated on Mon 23 May 2011 - 15:26:59 BST by hypermail 2.1.8