Hi all
I have had good results testing the latest -beng kernel:
3.2.44-vs2.3.2.16-beng #1 SMP Thu May 16 23:46:34 BST 2013 x86_64
Now I wanted to try to make a mini-kernel and compile util-vserver so
that I know I have the latest.
I am not certain I can find the latest. For example I am running the
following util-vserver (also from beng):
0.30.216-pre3038-1 amd64
The latest sources I can find are 0.30.215 from 2008.
This does not fill me with confidence that I have the right versions.
There is a lot of old documentation for vservers which has already
confused me enough. I now know how to use the current version for what I
want to do and I want to build on that.
What and where are the latest sources?
Thanks in advance, All the best
Allan
PS If someone (Ben) could make available to me the exact compile
environment and procedure as used for the -beng kernels it would give me
more confidence that my configuration is derived from what I am already
using.
On 17/05/13 15:33, Allan Latham wrote:
> Hi Ben
>
> Many thanks for your efforts.
>
> I use your util-veserver packages but I am still currently using the
> Debian Squeeze vsserver kernel.
>
> I intend to move away from this kernel during the next phase of the
> testing I am doing - either to yours or I will roll my own. It's years
> since I needed to compile the kernel and I see that Linux is now about
> 10 times the size!
>
> One thought occurs to me and I would be interested in the opinions of
> others.
>
> Basis is a suitable computer (x86_64) at one of the many server farms
> world wide:
>
> 1. The base kernel should come from whatever the server supplier
> recommends. He knows it supports his hardware, network etc. e.g. a
> minimal Squeeze or Wheezy installation will do fine.
>
> 2. On this kernel load the kvm modules. Besides supporting the
> hardware,lvm and starting one or more kvms this bare-metal kernel does
> nothing.
>
> 3. Run vservers inside kvm.
>
> This means that the kernel for the vservers can be vastly simplified.
> Most of the server configuration is devoted to hardware which disappears
> inside the vm. It is a standardised environment.
>
> Less is generally safer.
>
> I know a kvm is less efficient than bare-metal but I don't really care.
> The fact that I have an inner system which I can (near) instantly be
> moved to any server supplier is worth far more.
>
> What are your thoughts on such a 'standard mini-kernel' for use within a
> kvm? I suspect it could even be built without modules.
>
> All the best and once again thanks for all you're doing.
>
> Allan
>
> On 17/05/13 11:38, Ben Green wrote:
>> Quoting Ben Green <ben@bristolwireless.net>:
>>
>>> I'm rebuilding now with the relevant patch in place, a simple 1 liner.
>>> I'll upload to the Psand repos in the morning.
>>
>> Done, kernels now ready for download from the Psand repositories. Who'd
>> have thought 3 characters in the whole of the kernels source code could
>> cause such a fuss. Package and metapackage examples are as follows:
>>
>> Package: linux-image-vserver-3.2-beng
>> Version: 3.2.44-2.3.2.16+squeeze1
>>
>> Package: linux-image-3.2.44-vs2.3.2.16-beng
>> Source: linux-source-3.2.44-vs2.3.2.16-beng
>> Version: 0.2+squeeze1
>>
>> Note particularly the version number.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Ben
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Received on Wed May 22 10:59:54 2013