Hi Texas,
thank you for your interest in Debian. However the debian-devel@
mailing list is for development of Debian itself which your mail is not
about.
If you want personal support to implement solutions based on Debian,
you can try contacting someone providing services for Debian
(https://www.
On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 1:02 AM, Ponomarenko Andrey wrote:
> I continued to maintain ABI report for the Linux kernel:
> http://abi-laboratory.pro/tracker/timeline/linux/
You may want to:
Advertise this on LKML if you haven't already.
Advertise this on debian-kernel if you haven't already.
Add
On Tue, 2015-10-27 at 23:00 +0100, Dmitry Katsubo wrote:
> On 27/10/2015 10:31, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > > Hm, kernel.org says that 3.18 is the long-term support kernel.
> >
> > I'm afraid that LTS from kernel.org != stable support from Debian.
> >
> > Debian typically picks a single kernel versio
On 27/10/2015 10:31, Ian Campbell wrote:
>> Hm, kernel.org says that 3.18 is the long-term support kernel.
>
> I'm afraid that LTS from kernel.org != stable support from Debian.
>
> Debian typically picks a single kernel version for a stable release and
> supports it for the lifetime of that rele
On Mon, 2015-10-26 at 14:55 +0100, Dmitry Katsubo wrote:
> On 2015-10-25 07:11, Adam Borowski wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 10:59:47PM +0100, Simon McVittie wrote:
> > > On 24/10/15 22:17, Dmitry Katsubo wrote:
> > > > I would be happy to. However it does not allow me to use the latest
> > > >
On 2015-10-25 07:11, Adam Borowski wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 10:59:47PM +0100, Simon McVittie wrote:
>> On 24/10/15 22:17, Dmitry Katsubo wrote:
>>> I would be happy to. However it does not allow me to use the latest
>>> kernel from 3.x branch (3.16 is now 1 year old).
>>
>> All Debian stabl
On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 10:59:47PM +0100, Simon McVittie wrote:
> On 24/10/15 22:17, Dmitry Katsubo wrote:
> > I would be happy to. However it does not allow me to use the latest
> > kernel from 3.x branch (3.16 is now 1 year old).
>
> All Debian stable releases are intended to be used with the la
On 24/10/15 22:17, Dmitry Katsubo wrote:
> On 24/10/2015 14:56, James Cowgill wrote:
>> If you want something which gets updated and gets bug fixes, you
>> shouldn't be using snapshot.d.o and instead use a kernel from the
>> main archive. Install "linux-image-amd64" to get the latest one
>> from s
On 24/10/2015 14:56, James Cowgill wrote:
> On Sat, 2015-10-24 at 01:02 +0200, Dmitry Katsubo wrote:
>> On 23/10/2015 22:43, James Cowgill wrote:
>>> If you specifically want 3.18, you can download it from
>>> snapshot.debian.org. http://snapshot.debian.org/package/linux/
>>
>> Thanks, James! I t
On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 09:47:39AM -0400, kamaraju kusumanchi wrote:
> I am not the OP but want to offer two suggestions.
> 1) In cases like this where the number of hits are large, show results
> from current stable version onwards. That is instead of presenting
> results from squeeze, wheezy etc.
On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 3:39 AM, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 01:02:09AM +0200, Dmitry Katsubo wrote:
>> Thanks, James! I tried to search for "linux-image" but it finds only
>> kernels from squeeze and wheezy repos:
>>
>> > https://packages.debian.org/search?suite=all&arch=a
Hi,
On Sat, 2015-10-24 at 01:02 +0200, Dmitry Katsubo wrote:
> On 23/10/2015 22:43, James Cowgill wrote:
> > If you specifically want 3.18, you can download it from
> > snapshot.debian.org. http://snapshot.debian.org/package/linux/
>
> Thanks, James! I tried to search for "linux-image" but it fi
On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 01:02:09AM +0200, Dmitry Katsubo wrote:
> Thanks, James! I tried to search for "linux-image" but it finds only
> kernels from squeeze and wheezy repos:
>
> > https://packages.debian.org/search?suite=all&arch=any&searchon=names&keywords=linux-image
The page says "Your keywor
On 23/10/2015 22:43, James Cowgill wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, 2015-10-21 at 12:35 +0200, Dmitry Katsubo wrote:
>> Dear Debian developers,
>>
>> I wonder if somebody knows what are the plans for packaging
>> kernels 3.18.x and 4.2.x? 3.18 was released long time ago, and I
>> think it is mature. 4.2.
Dmitry Katsubo writes:
> I wonder if somebody knows what are the plans for packaging kernels
> 3.18.x and 4.2.x? 3.18 was released long time ago, and I think it is
> mature. 4.2.x would be nice to play with. I have searched here:
>> https://packages.debian.org/search?suite=all&searchon=names&key
Hi Dmitry,
On Wed, 21 Oct 2015 12:35:47 +0200, Dmitry Katsubo wrote:
> I wonder if somebody knows what are the plans for packaging kernels
> 3.18.x and 4.2.x? 3.18 was released long time ago, and I think it is
> mature. 4.2.x would be nice to play with. I have searched here:
>
> > https://packag
Hi,
On Wed, 2015-10-21 at 12:35 +0200, Dmitry Katsubo wrote:
> Dear Debian developers,
>
> I wonder if somebody knows what are the plans for packaging kernels
> 3.18.x and 4.2.x? 3.18 was released long time ago, and I think it is
> mature. 4.2.x would be nice to play with. I have searched here:
>
❦ 30 avril 2015 18:16 +0200, Markus Frosch :
> I was wondering if there is any special reason to upload linux-4.0 to
> experimental, but not uploading linux-kbuild-4.0?
>
> Would love to test the kernel without building it myself.
That's a frequent question. Some kernels got the kbuild stuff (
On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 12:16 AM, Markus Frosch wrote:
> I was wondering if there is any special reason to upload linux-4.0 to
> experimental, but not uploading linux-kbuild-4.0?
Seems like a question for this list:
https://lists.debian.org/debian-kernel/
> Would love to test the kernel without
On Thu, 2014-12-11 at 21:08 -0600, Benjamin Przybocki wrote:
> Hello,
> I am aware that Debian Jessie will be using Linux Kernel 3.16, however
> I was wondering if there is a possibility of Jessie including some of
> the features added in 3.17 such as: getrandom(), support for Acer
> C720, and supp
On Sat, 2014-08-30 at 21:29 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-07-23 at 17:07 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > On Wed, 2014-07-23 at 13:51 +0100, David Goodenough wrote:
> > > On Wednesday 23 July 2014 13:05:11 Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 2014-07-23 at 09:31 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote
On Wed, 2014-07-23 at 17:07 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-07-23 at 13:51 +0100, David Goodenough wrote:
> > On Wednesday 23 July 2014 13:05:11 Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2014-07-23 at 09:31 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> [...]
> > > > * As David observed upthread the list i
On Wed, 2014-07-23 at 13:51 +0100, David Goodenough wrote:
> On Wednesday 23 July 2014 13:05:11 Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > On Wed, 2014-07-23 at 09:31 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
[...]
> > > * As David observed upthread the list is bound to get out of date.
> > > * The link between "Suppor
On Wednesday 23 July 2014 13:05:11 Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-07-23 at 09:31 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > On Tue, 2014-07-22 at 20:50 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2014-07-22 at 20:18 +0100, David Goodenough wrote:
> > > > In the above package the description reads:-
> > > >
On Wed, 2014-07-23 at 09:31 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-07-22 at 20:50 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > On Tue, 2014-07-22 at 20:18 +0100, David Goodenough wrote:
> > > In the above package the description reads:-
> > >
> > > The Linux kernel 3.14 and modules for use on ARMv7 multipla
On Tue, 2014-07-22 at 20:50 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-07-22 at 20:18 +0100, David Goodenough wrote:
> > In the above package the description reads:-
> >
> > The Linux kernel 3.14 and modules for use on ARMv7 multiplatform kernel for
> > Marvell Armada 370/xp, Freescale iMX5x/iMX6
On Tue, 2014-07-22 at 20:18 +0100, David Goodenough wrote:
> In the above package the description reads:-
>
> The Linux kernel 3.14 and modules for use on ARMv7 multiplatform kernel for
> Marvell Armada 370/xp, Freescale iMX5x/iMX6.
>
> Reading the list of DTB files it includes, this list is rat
On Tue, 22 Jul 2014 20:18:29 +0100
David Goodenough wrote:
> In the above package the description reads:-
>
> The Linux kernel 3.14 and modules for use on ARMv7 multiplatform
> kernel for Marvell Armada 370/xp, Freescale iMX5x/iMX6.
>
> Reading the list of DTB files it includes, this list is ra
Hi,
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 05:12:59AM +0600, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 12:06:16PM +0100, Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote:
> > This blogpost is months old but it makes some interesting reflections:
> > http://www.pappp.net/?p=969
> https://plus.google.com/u/0/11554768395172769
I demand that Adam Borowski may or may not have written...
[snip]
> No, it's something in the middle. Those who dislike systemd say it
> exaggerates systemd's claimed benefits, while Joss considers it an attack
> as well. Let's no go there for now.
>
> What makes this article worth reading is t
Russ Allbery wrote:
> Adam Borowski writes:
>
> > There are two ways to design a system:
> > * a monolithic well-integrated system, granting features and efficiency at
> > the cost of portability and hackability
> > * the traditional Unix way, with a stress on replaceable tools that do only
> >
On 2013-01-23 20:45:49 -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Adam Borowski writes:
>
> > There are two ways to design a system:
> > * a monolithic well-integrated system, granting features and efficiency at
> > the cost of portability and hackability
> > * the traditional Unix way, with a stress on repl
Le mercredi 23 janvier 2013 à 21:03 +0100, Florian Weimer a écrit :
> Unfortunately, a lot of this doesn't apply to the polkit version in
> experimental, which replaces .plka files with Javascript (which
> sort-of enforces that only system administrators can configure polkit,
> and not other packa
Chow Loong Jin writes:
> * But if it ever fails due to a bug within it, $DEITY help you, because
> you're going to have to go through everything mentioned in your first
> point here (save the issues with getting patches accepted)
Sometimes, debugging can be easier in monoli
Adam Borowski writes:
> Putting it another way:
> * the monolithic design has a huge freeness problem. To do anything not on
> a rigid list of features you need to learn the intricaties of a large
> complex system, and you can be certain that even if you manage to do so,
> your patches wi
On 24/01/2013 13:09, Adam Borowski wrote:
> [...]
> * the monolithic design has a huge freeness problem. To do anything not on
> a rigid list of features you need to learn the intricaties of a large
> complex system, and you can be certain that even if you manage to do so,
> your patches wil
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 08:45:49PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Adam Borowski writes:
>
> > There are two ways to design a system:
> > * a monolithic well-integrated system, granting features and efficiency at
> > the cost of portability and hackability
> > * the traditional Unix way, with a st
Adam Borowski writes:
> There are two ways to design a system:
> * a monolithic well-integrated system, granting features and efficiency at
> the cost of portability and hackability
> * the traditional Unix way, with a stress on replaceable tools that do only
> one thing, granting freedom to
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 08:16:40PM +0100, Philipp Kern wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 02:57:58PM +0100, Svante Signell wrote:
> > On Tue, 2013-01-22 at 14:41 +0100, Adam Borowski wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 12:06:16PM +0100, Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote:
> > > > This blogpost is months old
* Jon Dowland:
> On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 10:46:33AM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
>> You might find this useful:
>> http://np237.livejournal.com/33449.html
>>
>> I made this presentation in the hope to make such things easier to
>> understand for the sysadmin.
>
> Just for the record I found it
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 02:57:58PM +0100, Svante Signell wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-01-22 at 14:41 +0100, Adam Borowski wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 12:06:16PM +0100, Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote:
> > > This blogpost is months old but it makes some interesting reflections:
> > > http://www.pappp.net/
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 10:46:33AM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> You might find this useful:
> http://np237.livejournal.com/33449.html
>
> I made this presentation in the hope to make such things easier to
> understand for the sysadmin.
Just for the record I found it a good read, and mentally
Josselin Mouette writes:
> You might find this useful:
> http://np237.livejournal.com/33449.html
>
> I made this presentation in the hope to make such things easier to
> understand for the sysadmin.
I read that back then when you originally posted it and I still think
it's one of the most useful
Le mardi 22 janvier 2013 à 16:32 -0500, Theodore Ts'o a écrit :
> One of the big things which is incredibly frustrating with the D-Bus
> interfaces is that they aren't documented; and if they are documented,
> it's not obvious where.
I can only agree completely. It is very frustrating for some pl
On 01/22/2013 09:05 AM, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le mardi 22 janvier 2013 à 14:57 +0100, Svante Signell a écrit :
Worthwhile to read, definitely.
Yet full of misinformation, like the idea that using D-Bus makes a service
less scriptable (while the reality is a complete opposite), or that
conf
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 12:06:16PM +0100, Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote:
> Hello,
>
> This blogpost is months old but it makes some interesting reflections:
>
> http://www.pappp.net/?p=969
https://plus.google.com/u/0/115547683951727699051/posts/74r518xVUNH
--
WBR, wRAR
signature.asc
Description:
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 03:05:58PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Yet full of misinformation, like the idea that using D-Bus makes a
> service less scriptable (while the reality is a complete opposite), or
> that configuration files are less human-readable than shell scripts.
My biggest complain
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 3:05 PM, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le mardi 22 janvier 2013 à 14:57 +0100, Svante Signell a écrit :
> > Worthwhile to read, definitely.
>
> Yet full of misinformation, like the idea that using D-Bus makes a
> service less scriptable (while the reality is a complete opposit
Josselin Mouette writes:
> Yet full of misinformation, like the idea that using D-Bus makes a
> service less scriptable (while the reality is a complete opposite)
I was bit puzzled by this part too but I guess the author meant mostly
shell scripts here. If one uses e.g. python then dbus is often
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 03:05:58PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le mardi 22 janvier 2013 à 14:57 +0100, Svante Signell a écrit :
> > Worthwhile to read, definitely.
>
> Yet full of misinformation, like the idea that using D-Bus makes a
> service less scriptable (while the reality is a complet
Le mardi 22 janvier 2013 à 14:57 +0100, Svante Signell a écrit :
> Worthwhile to read, definitely.
Yet full of misinformation, like the idea that using D-Bus makes a
service less scriptable (while the reality is a complete opposite), or
that configuration files are less human-readable than shell
On Tue, 2013-01-22 at 14:41 +0100, Adam Borowski wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 12:06:16PM +0100, Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > This blogpost is months old but it makes some interesting reflections:
> >
> > http://www.pappp.net/?p=969
>
> It appears to be the most insightful th
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 12:06:16PM +0100, Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote:
> Hello,
>
> This blogpost is months old but it makes some interesting reflections:
>
> http://www.pappp.net/?p=969
It appears to be the most insightful thing about systemd vs the rest of the
world I've ever read. READ IT, FOL
On 2012-03-08 15:42:49 +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> Since 'at' is going to be updated in stable, I added a versioned
> 'Breaks' instead.
But since there may be other problems than with "at", announcing
the change in the NEWS file would have probably be a good idea.
Things that an admin was usuall
On Thu, 2012-03-08 at 12:19 +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2012-03-02 05:11:58 +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > I'm therefore intending to warn about this with the following NEWS
> > entry in the linux-image metapackages:
> >
> > Index: debian/linux-image.NEWS
> > =
Hi,
On 2012-03-02 05:11:58 +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> I'm therefore intending to warn about this with the following NEWS
> entry in the linux-image metapackages:
>
> Index: debian/linux-image.NEWS
> ===
> --- debian/linux-image.NE
On 02.03.2012 10:47, Holger Levsen wrote:
On Freitag, 2. März 2012, Kees Cook wrote:
> + * The new kernel version includes security restrictions on
links,
> +These restrictions may cause some legitimate programs to
fail.
> +In particular, if the 'at' package is installed, you should
e
On Fri, 2012-03-02 at 07:43 +, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 02, 2012 at 05:11:58AM +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > + * The new kernel version includes security restrictions on links, which
> > +are enabled by default. These are specified in
> > +Documentation/sysctl/fs.txt in t
Hi,
On Freitag, 2. März 2012, Kees Cook wrote:
> > + * The new kernel version includes security restrictions on links,
> > +These restrictions may cause some legitimate programs to fail.
> > +In particular, if the 'at' package is installed, you should either:
> > +- Upgrade it to at l
On Fri, Mar 02, 2012 at 05:11:58AM +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> + * The new kernel version includes security restrictions on links, which
> +are enabled by default. These are specified in
> +Documentation/sysctl/fs.txt in the linux-doc-3.2 and linux-source-3.2
> +packages.
It'd be h
On 12-03-02 at 05:11am, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> The longstanding link restriction patches were recently accepted by
> Andrew Morton and are likely to end up in Linux 3.4. I've applied
> these to src:linux-2.6 in svn and they should end up in the upcoming
> version 3.2.9-1.
>
> We know that these a
On Fri, Mar 02, 2012 at 05:11:58AM +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> The longstanding link restriction patches were recently accepted by
> Andrew Morton and are likely to end up in Linux 3.4. I've applied
> these to src:linux-2.6 in svn and they should end up in the upcoming
> version 3.2.9-1.
That's
m...@linux.it (Marco d'Itri) writes:
> On Jan 30, Holger Levsen wrote:
>
>> > http://blog.bofh.it/debian/id_413
>> would you mind filing a bug about this?! Refering to your blog post is nice,
> Yes, since the upstream maintainers do not consider this to be a bug.
>
> --
> ciao,
> Marco
There a
On Tue, 07 Feb 2012, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Feb 07, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> > Are you trying to make the point that, with containers,
> > you wouldn't need ssh, and you would with VMs? If so,
> With *OpenVZ* I do not need sshd, ftpd and cron in the guest because
> I can use the one in the host.
On Tue, Feb 07, 2012 at 06:09:40PM +0100, Vincent Bernat wrote:
[...]
> It applies. The major point is that with containers, RAM is shared
> accross containers (the same kernel is used for all containers). If one
> container needs for a few seconds 200 MB, it can just use them. No
> me
OoO En ce début d'après-midi nuageux du mardi 07 février 2012, vers
14:00, Thomas Goirand disait :
>> With vservers and OpenVZ you can run each service in its own container
>> with a small memory footprint. With Xen/KVM, you will need to allocate
>> at least 128 MB for each container.
>>
On Feb 07, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> Are you trying to make the point that, with containers,
> you wouldn't need ssh, and you would with VMs? If so,
With *OpenVZ* I do not need sshd, ftpd and cron in the guest because
I can use the one in the host.
It's a custom environment, but I have no way to d
On Wed, 8 Feb 2012, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> With Etch, 48 MB was enough. With Lenny, 64 MB was enough.
> With Squeeze, 96 MB is enough (the minimum is between 64 and
> 96 MB, I didn't care investigating). And with 96 MB, you can already
> run a DNS server, OpenVPN, or a (very basic) mail server. T
On 02/03/2012 08:53 PM, Adam Borowski wrote:
>> ssh works.
>>
> It triples the memory footprint of an empty Debian container (init + syslogd +
> cron[1]), and adds a new daemon that can be potentially subverted.
>
> Of course, usually sshd is strongly preferred (so much better than needing
> n
On 02/03/2012 01:55 AM, Vincent Bernat wrote:
> With vservers and OpenVZ you can run each service in its own container
> with a small memory footprint. With Xen/KVM, you will need to allocate
> at least 128 MB for each container.
>
NO ! The limit isn't that great.
With Etch, 48 MB was enoug
On Sat, Feb 04, 2012 at 05:15:26PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Feb 03, Bastian Blank wrote:
>
> > > http://blog.bofh.it/debian/id_413
> > This example shows nothing new. If you have CAP_SYS_MOUNT, you can also
> > just mount the root filesystem into your own tree.
> >
> > Linux-VServer does
On Feb 03, Bastian Blank wrote:
> > http://blog.bofh.it/debian/id_413
> This example shows nothing new. If you have CAP_SYS_MOUNT, you can also
> just mount the root filesystem into your own tree.
>
> Linux-VServer does not help against processes with too much
> capabilities, not sure about Open
On Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 12:31:03PM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 02:31:15AM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> > On Jan 30, Adam Borowski wrote:
> > > It would be nice to have some documentation about how lxc is different
> > > from
> > > them, and how to work around bugs and li
On Wed, Feb 01, 2012 at 07:37:38PM +, Moritz Naumann wrote:
> So there are obvious issues with LXC as a container solution for Linux, such
> as
> lacking actual containment (for the root user)
No, it is not obvious. If you give a process a certain permission, it
can use it. If you remove this
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 02:31:15AM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Jan 30, Adam Borowski wrote:
> > It would be nice to have some documentation about how lxc is different from
> > them, and how to work around bugs and limitations. I for one spent ~10
> Let's start with this: in its current form,
unsubscribe
On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 1:22 PM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> Debian 7.0 'wheezy' will include Linux 3.2. This is currently in
> unstable and will soon enter testing.
>
> The kernel team is open to backporting some features from later kernel
> versions, particularly to support newer hardw
OoO En cette nuit striée d'éclairs du jeudi 02 février 2012, vers 02:21,
Russell Coker disait :
>> However, a low profile container/virtualization solution is needed, and I
>> know there is quite some demand for it: both some larger scale
>> organisations and several smaller/non-profit organisati
On Thu, 2012-02-02 at 09:29 +0200, Jonathan Carter (highvoltage) wrote:
[...]
> We tried the 2.6.32 VZ kernel on squeeze / wheezy / lucid / precise -
> and it works.
That's what I would expect, but it's good to know.
> We have a PPA[1] for our experimental packages too. We
> might run into bugs
On 02.02.2012 02:21 Russell Coker wrote:
> Are there many users who need root containment but who won't have the
> resources to run Xen or KVM when the support for Squeeze ends?
I am convinced there are several hosting providers and NGOs who use
linux-vservers for (amongst other) the purpose of r
Hi Russell
On 02/02/2012 03:21, Russell Coker wrote:
However, a low profile container/virtualization solution is needed, and I
know there is quite some demand for it: both some larger scale
organisations and several smaller/non-profit organisations I am acquainted
with use either OpenVZ or linux
On Feb 02, Russell Coker wrote:
> Are there many users who need root containment but who won't have the
> resources to run Xen or KVM when the support for Squeeze ends?
Are there many users who like to waste resources (mostly RAM, here) for
no good reason?
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Descri
On Thu, 2 Feb 2012, Moritz Naumann
wrote:
> So there are obvious issues with LXC as a container solution for Linux,
> such as lacking actual containment (for the root user), which defeat sits
> purpose in production environments as a linux-vserver or OpenVZ
> replacement.
>
> However, a low prof
On 02/02/2012 03:37 AM, Moritz Naumann wrote:
> So there are obvious issues with LXC as a container solution for Linux, such
> as
> lacking actual containment (for the root user), which defeat sits purpose in
> production environments as a linux-vserver or OpenVZ replacement.
>
> However, a low p
So there are obvious issues with LXC as a container solution for Linux, such as
lacking actual containment (for the root user), which defeat sits purpose in
production environments as a linux-vserver or OpenVZ replacement.
However, a low profile container/virtualization solution is needed, and I
On Mon, 2012-01-30 at 08:02 -0500, Brad Spengler wrote:
> Frankly it makes more sense for me to offer .debs myself than to deal
> with a bureaucracy and non-standard kernel in Debian. It contains
> who-knows-what extra code, and I doubt anyone looked at any of it to see if
> it allows for some
Am Montag, 30. Januar 2012, 11:44:10 schrieb Marco d'Itri:
> On Jan 30, Holger Levsen wrote:
> > > http://blog.bofh.it/debian/id_413
> >
> > would you mind filing a bug about this?! Refering to your blog post is
> > nice,
>
> Yes, since the upstream maintainers do not consider this to be a bug.
[Brad Spengler]
> Frankly it makes more sense for me to offer .debs myself than to deal
> with a bureaucracy and non-standard kernel in Debian. It contains
> who-knows-what extra code, and I doubt anyone looked at any of it to
> see if it allows for some way to leak information I prevent against
On Mon, 2012-01-30 at 11:05 +0100, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
> (adding few CC:s to keep track on the bug)
>
> On dim., 2012-01-29 at 21:26 +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > On Sun, 2012-01-29 at 20:57 +0100, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
> > > On dim., 2012-01-29 at 18:22 +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > >
> Indeed. Brad, I'm not sure if you received the initial mail, so if you
> have any comment???
It looks like there were quite a few messages I wasn't involved in ;)
Regarding minimizing the patchset, we do that already where we see
opportunities to do so. We used to carry a large constifying
On 01/30/2012 01:44 AM, Adam Borowski wrote:
[...]
> * how to ensure good isolation while still being able to do useful work?
> The point of vserver is that even root inside a VM shouldn't be able to
> affect the host, on lxc you keep hurting the host by accident. Messing
> with capabiliti
On Jan 30, Holger Levsen wrote:
> > http://blog.bofh.it/debian/id_413
> would you mind filing a bug about this?! Refering to your blog post is nice,
Yes, since the upstream maintainers do not consider this to be a bug.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
(adding few CC:s to keep track on the bug)
On dim., 2012-01-29 at 21:26 +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Sun, 2012-01-29 at 20:57 +0100, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
> > On dim., 2012-01-29 at 18:22 +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > > Featuresets
> > > ---
> > >
> > > The only featureset provid
Hi Marco,
thanks for these infos!
On Montag, 30. Januar 2012, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> Let's start with this: in its current form, it is not designed to
> protect the host system from an untrusted root user in a guest.
> So far lxc is nice for testing, but not much more.
> http://blog.bofh.it/debian
On Jan 30, Adam Borowski wrote:
> lxc wasn't anywhere near feature parity with vserver/openvz then.
And it still isn't.
> It would be nice to have some documentation about how lxc is different from
> them, and how to work around bugs and limitations. I for one spent ~10
Let's start with this: i
On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 09:26:11PM +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Sun, 2012-01-29 at 20:57 +0100, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
> > On dim., 2012-01-29 at 18:22 +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > > Featuresets
> > > ---
> > >
> > > The only featureset provided will be 'rt' (realtime)
> > >
> >
On Sun, 2012-01-29 at 21:26 +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > So in the end what are the reasons for not trying the grsecurity
> > featureset? #605090 lacks any reply from the kernel team since quite a
> > while, and especially after answers were provided to question asked.
Whew I'd also be waiti
On Sun, 2012-01-29 at 20:57 +0100, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
> On dim., 2012-01-29 at 18:22 +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > Featuresets
> > ---
> >
> > The only featureset provided will be 'rt' (realtime), currently built
> > for amd64 only. If there is interest in realtime support for oth
On dim., 2012-01-29 at 18:22 +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> Featuresets
> ---
>
> The only featureset provided will be 'rt' (realtime), currently built
> for amd64 only. If there is interest in realtime support for other
> architectures, we may be able to add that. However, we do need to
Le samedi 31 décembre 2011 à 14:21 +0100, Svante Signell a écrit :
> Currently I have 164 packages from unstable not being upgraded since I
> don't want to dist-upgrade. Will a majority of these packages be
> installed after installing gnome-session-fallback. Packages I want
> upgraded are e.g. br
On Sat, 2011-12-31 at 01:00 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le vendredi 30 dcembre 2011 19:20 +0100, Svante Signell a crit :
> > I'm very reluctant to upgrade to gnome3, I have it on one box, and
> > don't like it.
...
> > Looks like there is a gnome-session-fallback similar to gnome 2
> > avai
1 - 100 of 439 matches
Mail list logo
