Robert Nelson | 1 Dec 02:15 2008

Re: Fedora 10 i386/x86_64 default/minimal OS Templatesreleased to contrib

You mean the one that has this on the wiki page?

    Changes
        Initial 2.6.26 release: very unstable, not recommended to use

Does anyone know what the plan is regarding producing a new 
"stable/reliable/usable" version of an OpenVZ kernel beyond 2.6.18?

I thought it was going to be 2.6.24 but it has never transitioned from 
development.  Now there seems to be this new development kernel based on 
2.6.26.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Michael H. Warfield" <mhw@...>
To: <users@...>
Cc: <mhw@...>
Sent: Sunday, November 30, 2008 3:49 PM
Subject: Re: [Users] Fedora 10 i386/x86_64 default/minimal OS 
Templatesreleased to contrib

On Sun, 2008-11-30 at 13:03 -0800, Robert Nelson wrote:
> Which version of the OpenVZ kernel are you using to run containers built
> using this template?  I've tried using the 2.6.18 RHEL5 versions but a
> number of commands fail.  It appears that Fedora 10 isn't compatible with
> the older kernels.  For example "touch x" results in "touch: setting times
> of `x': Bad address".  At first I thought it was something wrong with the
> vzpkg2 templates I created but it also happened with your template.

 Wow...  I'm not sure I would even expect that to work.  I might expect
older applications and distros to run on newer kernels (they do strive
(Continue reading)

albinootje | 1 Dec 03:02 2008
Picon

Re: Fedora 10 i386/x86_64 default/minimal OS Templatesreleased to contrib

Robert Nelson wrote:

> You mean the one that has this on the wiki page?
> 
>    Changes
>        Initial 2.6.26 release: very unstable, not recommended to use

Meanwhile Ubuntu has 2.6.24 OpenVZ kernels for their LTS release Hardy
Heron :

http://packages.ubuntu.com/search?keywords=openvz

> Does anyone know what the plan is regarding producing a new
> "stable/reliable/usable" version of an OpenVZ kernel beyond 2.6.18?
> 
> I thought it was going to be 2.6.24 but it has never transitioned from
> development.  Now there seems to be this new development kernel based on
> 2.6.26.
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael H. Warfield" <mhw@...>
> To: <users@...>
> Cc: <mhw@...>
> Sent: Sunday, November 30, 2008 3:49 PM
> Subject: Re: [Users] Fedora 10 i386/x86_64 default/minimal OS
> Templatesreleased to contrib
> 
> On Sun, 2008-11-30 at 13:03 -0800, Robert Nelson wrote:
>> Which version of the OpenVZ kernel are you using to run containers built
>> using this template?  I've tried using the 2.6.18 RHEL5 versions but a
>> number of commands fail.  It appears that Fedora 10 isn't compatible with
(Continue reading)

Michael H. Warfield | 1 Dec 04:17 2008

Re: Fedora 10 i386/x86_64 default/minimal OS Templatesreleased to contrib

On Sun, 2008-11-30 at 17:15 -0800, Robert Nelson wrote:
> You mean the one that has this on the wiki page?
> 
>     Changes
>         Initial 2.6.26 release: very unstable, not recommended to use

	That's the one.  And, as usual, the wiki is very behind and the
developers are very conservative and their definition of "very unstable"
beats the bejesus out of some people's "stable".  I've build out of git
and been uncomfortable but I've wished they would cut more releases more
often.  They've been very stable for me.  Production release stable.
I've had no heartburn at all at rolling an rpm of one of those into my
production systems.

> Does anyone know what the plan is regarding producing a new 
> "stable/reliable/usable" version of an OpenVZ kernel beyond 2.6.18?

	RedHat 6 is likely to be on a 2.6.26+.  Their view of "stable" seems to
be "blessed on RHEL".

> I thought it was going to be 2.6.24 but it has never transitioned from 
> development.  Now there seems to be this new development kernel based on 
> 2.6.26.

	I would now like to see something on 2.6.27 ASAP.  With some of the
rumblings from a couple other luminaries, that may just be the next
major stability point.

	Bottom line is that if you want the features and you're going to ride
the wave (Fedora) you're going to have to ride those development
(Continue reading)

Scott Dowdle | 1 Dec 17:06 2008

Re: Fedora 10 i386/x86_64 default/minimal OS Templates released to contrib

Robert,

----- "Robert Nelson" <robertn@...> wrote:
> Which version of the OpenVZ kernel are you using to run containers
> built using this template?  I've tried using the 2.6.18 RHEL5 versions but a 
> number of commands fail.  It appears that Fedora 10 isn't compatible
> with  the older kernels.  For example "touch x" results in "touch: setting
> times of `x': Bad address".  At first I thought it was something wrong with
> the vzpkg2 templates I created but it also happened with your template.

Yeah, I'm using the current RHEL5 based kernel and yeah, it has some issues.  It isn't the OS Template's fault
though... and this isn't the only OS Template that is affected by this bug.

The bug was reported by some Gentoo folks a while back... and we have been told it would be fixed in an upcoming
kernel update... but I believe they have had two kernel updates since that have left it out.

Over the holiday break there was even some bickering on the bug report.  Here's the bug report:

http://bugzilla.openvz.org/show_bug.cgi?id=970

TYL,
--

-- 
Scott Dowdle
704 Church Street
Belgrade, MT 59714
(406)388-0827 [home]
(406)994-3931 [work]
Scott Dowdle | 1 Dec 17:18 2008

Looking for a newer/next stable OpenVZ kernel branch?

Michael,

----- "Michael H. Warfield" <mhw@...> wrote:
> Red Hat 6 is likely to be on a 2.6.26+.  Their view of "stable" seems
> to be "blessed on RHEL".

I believe this too but I haven't gotten any confirmation from anyone who makes the decisions. :)  I think the
reason they prefer to pick a RHEL kernel is because they know it will be supported by an organization that
has a lot of kernel talent and a solid commitment to supporting it for years.  That may also account for the
OpenVZ Project being somewhat commited to 2.6.24 with an Ubuntu LTS version using it.

There is been a considerable amount of churn in the newer kernels, especially as they get container
features added... and I'm sure that the OpenVZ kernel developers would like to take advantage of those
features but which kernel to pick?  The mainline development cycle seems to be around 3 months now and they
don't seem to be committed to supporting any particular version for too long... although rumor has it that
2.6.27 has some blessing and may be maintained for a while.

So far as running newer distros inside of a container on hosts nodes with the older RHEL5 2.6.18 based
kernels goes... barring bug 970 (which should be fixed RSN)... it isn't really a problem.  Well, I guess it
can be a problem if you would prefer to use a much newer distro as your host node... and your host node distro
is unhappy running the RHEL5 2.6.18 kernel.

BTW, my DSL modem at home decided that it no longer knows what electricity is and I've had to order a new one
which should arrive sometime tomorrow... so I've been down for a few days... until I got back to work today
after the holiday break.

TYL,
--

-- 
Scott Dowdle
704 Church Street
(Continue reading)

Scott Dowdle | 1 Dec 18:03 2008

Updated Fedora metadata package for vzpkg2

Greetings,

Just wanted to mention that Robert Nelson released (on Nov. 30th) an updated OS Template Metadata package
for Fedora that now includes Fedora 10 i386/x86_64 in the small, minimal and default flavors.

Robert... question for you... and this is probably covered in the man page but I thought I'd ask here so
others could benefit from your answer...

Let's say that I want to use vzpkg2 to build all of my OS Templates but I'd like to create OS Templates for both
my own consumption (using my local pkg-cacher) and for mass consumption (not using my local pkg-cacher). 
Is there a vzpkgcache flag that I can use to turn on and off usage of pkg-cacher?

Thanks,
--

-- 
Scott Dowdle
704 Church Street
Belgrade, MT 59714
(406)388-0827 [home]
(406)994-3931 [work]
Henrik Holmboe | 2 Dec 00:19 2008
Picon

Re: Re: 4gb seg fixup - centos5 HN and VE, with Xen

++ 27/11/08 15:48 +0100 - Aleksandar Ivanisevic:
>I have the same problem with the same setup, so at least it is
>reproducible ;)

Good to know. Do you experience any problem with a plain Xen domU
(provided by Centos, and thus without OpenVZ)?

>Is this causing any real problems for you except messed up console and
>syslog filling with useless messgaes?

Not really. But as Marcin suggested I guess it degrades the performance.
And I don't have a good feeling about it. :) I would of course
appreciate if someone more knowledgeable would say if I need to worry.

Thanks,
Henrik

--

-- 
Henrik Holmboe, Stockholm, Sweden
<http://henrik.holmboe.se/contact/>
Henrik Holmboe | 2 Dec 00:22 2008
Picon

Re: 4gb seg fixup - centos5 HN and VE, with Xen

Hello Marcin,

++ 27/11/08 17:45 +0000 - Marcin Owsiany:
>The only thing that comes to mind is: try running ldconfig. I think it
>runs by default on system startup, but it won't hurt to try..

Thanks for your suggestion, didn't think of this one. However I tried it
and unfortunately it didn't solve the problem.

>Other than that - this is a xen-specific problem, so maybe try asking on
>xen mailing lists...

I understand why you think it's Xen specific, but the problem is that
I'm not seeing this with the stock Centos Xen kernel, of which (well RH)
OpenVZ is basing their Xen flavor on.

And, I tried all the tricks that the Xen community seem to have on
solving this issue. Problem still persists.

All the best,
Henrik

--

-- 
Henrik Holmboe, Stockholm, Sweden
<http://henrik.holmboe.se/contact/>
Robert Nelson | 2 Dec 03:31 2008

Re: Fedora 10 i386/x86_64 default/minimal OS Templatesreleased to contrib

Yeah the problem is the utimens/futimens system calls.  The newer versions 
of Fedora use them and the 2.6.18 kernel doesn't support them.  I've updated 
my test and build environments to the 2.6.24 Development kernel.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Scott Dowdle" <dowdle@...>
To: <users@...>
Sent: Monday, December 01, 2008 8:06 AM
Subject: Re: [Users] Fedora 10 i386/x86_64 default/minimal OS 
Templatesreleased to contrib

> Robert,
>
> ----- "Robert Nelson" <robertn@...> wrote:
>> Which version of the OpenVZ kernel are you using to run containers
>> built using this template?  I've tried using the 2.6.18 RHEL5 versions 
>> but a
>> number of commands fail.  It appears that Fedora 10 isn't compatible
>> with  the older kernels.  For example "touch x" results in "touch: 
>> setting
>> times of `x': Bad address".  At first I thought it was something wrong 
>> with
>> the vzpkg2 templates I created but it also happened with your template.
>
> Yeah, I'm using the current RHEL5 based kernel and yeah, it has some 
> issues.  It isn't the OS Template's fault though... and this isn't the 
> only OS Template that is affected by this bug.
>
> The bug was reported by some Gentoo folks a while back... and we have been 
> told it would be fixed in an upcoming kernel update... but I believe they 
(Continue reading)

Robert Nelson | 2 Dec 03:47 2008

Re: Updated Fedora metadata package for vzpkg2

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Scott Dowdle" <dowdle@...>
To: "openvzusers" <users@...>
Sent: Monday, December 01, 2008 9:03 AM
Subject: [Users] Updated Fedora metadata package for vzpkg2

> Greetings,
>
> Just wanted to mention that Robert Nelson released (on Nov. 30th) an 
> updated OS Template Metadata package for Fedora that now includes Fedora 
> 10 i386/x86_64 in the small, minimal and default flavors.
>

Scott, you're jumping the gun a bit there ;-).  I'm in the process of 
releasing updated templates.  I have the rpm ones done and tested but I 
haven't built and tested the debs yet.

> Robert... question for you... and this is probably covered in the man page 
> but I thought I'd ask here so others could benefit from your answer...
>
> Let's say that I want to use vzpkg2 to build all of my OS Templates but 
> I'd like to create OS Templates for both my own consumption (using my 
> local pkg-cacher) and for mass consumption (not using my local 
> pkg-cacher).  Is there a vzpkgcache flag that I can use to turn on and off 
> usage of pkg-cacher?
>

Hmm, I hadn't given much thought to that scenario.  I sort of anticipated 
that folks would share the metadata packages rather than the built 
templates.
(Continue reading)


Gmane