[Planetlab-devel] Fwd: [CVS] svn.planet-lab.org - check in: r16073 -
Thierry.Parmentelat at sophia.inria.fr
Fri Dec 11 12:11:07 EST 2009
bringing this to devel...
Begin forwarded message:
> From: Sapan Bhatia <sapanb at CS.Princeton.EDU>
> Date: December 11, 2009 4:48:56 PM GMT+01:00
> To: caglar at princeton.edu
> Cc: Barış Metin <baris at metin.org>, Thierry Parmentelat <Thierry.Parmentelat at sophia.inria.fr>, Marc Fiuczynski <mef at CS.Princeton.EDU>, Andy Bavier <acb at CS.Princeton.EDU>
> Subject: Re: [CVS] svn.planet-lab.org - check in: r16073 - linux-2.6/trunk
> adding andy to this thread.
> My feeling would be that since we are basically done with the 18.104.22.168
> kernel, we should go ahead with this smaller upgrade. Fortunately,
> moving from 22.214.171.124 gets us half way through to 2.6.31, so it's not
> as if the effort is wasted. For instance, a lot of the work we did to
> make our code play well with NetNS will just get reused for 2.6.31.
Past experience seems to show that it takes us quite a while to move to a new kernel sublevel; so I feel like it's useful for us to deploy some 2.6.27 asap, while we start moving to the 31 sublevel on the codebase side.
About that, just to make myself clear and to answer Caglar's comment below, my 'f12' branch is only about rebuilding a vserver-capable kernel for a plain fedora box, and I plan on using this to set up a new f12-based build&test infrastructure over here.
Turns out Daniel does not plan on publishing such a thing, and the current centos5.4 set up won't let us build for f11 and above.
I do not plan on using this as a basis for a PL 2.6.31 kernel, and I agree that this would not be the right angle.
(I've been lucky with this one though, as only 4 of the zillion of fedora patches turned out to conflict with the vs patch)
Admittedly this f12 branch could sit some place else, if this is confusing.
> 2009/12/11 S.Çağlar Onur <caglar at princeton.edu>:
>> On Fri 11/12/09 09:35 , Barış Metin <baris at metin.org> wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>> I was thinking, shall we start moving to 2.6.31? If the next RH
>>> release will be based on Fedora 12 and we're going to base ourself
>>> Centos, it may be a good idea to start porting our patches.
>>> There is an "experimental" linux-vserver (vs126.96.36.199.27) patch for
>>> 188.8.131.52 and Thierry already created a branch called f12 as you may
>>> What do you think?
>> I think starting to port the patches to a Fedora kernel may not be a good idea if we won't use the PL patchset on top of Fedora Kernel. IMHO currently RHEL is adding hundreds of patches to their kernel which makes the fedora porting obsolete.
>> Best regards,
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Devel