On Dec 03, James Cloos <cloos@jhcloos.com> wrote: > Most openvz run on kernels based on 2.6.32, often with significant > updates. These platforms are an important segment, given how affordable > they are. And Debian "stable" is often too archaic for many needs which > fit nicely on a small inexpensive server. > > There should be a way to continue to use sid on these platforms. I agree. On Dec 04, Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org> wrote: > > The latest glibc update breaks most sid installs on (typically leased) > > openvz platforms because it requires a newer kernel version that most > > openvz vendors advertize. > Is it possible for these vendors to switch to a newer version of Linux? Not at this time, there is just no viable replacement: I expect that it will take a few years for the replacement to mature to the level of the current 2.6.32 OpenVZ/Virtuozzo kernel. (The problem is not just implementing the virtualization features with namespaces but also replacing the resources accounting system.) On Dec 04, Vincent Danjean <vdanjean.ml@free.fr> wrote: > Perhaps they will be more willing to do it when consumers wont be able > to install the distribution they want on their VM. As an hosting provider I can say with some authority that this is not how it works: nobody is going to replace their OpenVZ/Virtuozzo infrastructure just because newer Debian releases will not work: they will just stop supporting newer Debian releases until they will switch to namespaces-based virtualization (2-5 years?). On Dec 04, Aurelien Jarno <aurelien@aurel32.net> wrote: > If you consider Debian "stable" as too archaic, I am missing words to > qualify a 2.6.32 kernel released in 2009. Prehistoric maybe? Unlike Debian, Red Hat keeps backporting new features in the kernels used by their stable distributions and then will support security fixes for a very long time. So these kernels are not in any way comparable to the Debian 2.6.32 ones. -- ciao, Marco
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature