<html>
  <head>
    <meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
      http-equiv="Content-Type">
  </head>
  <body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 03/06/2014 06:13 PM, spameden wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CAHCALeyxqLTRLn-37W8e3FdQet7OJRCybbGE2WTRNaWBk4Umgg@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">
      <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
        charset=ISO-8859-1">
      <div dir="ltr">Hi<br>
        <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
          <br>
          <div class="gmail_quote">2014-03-07 5:28 GMT+04:00 Kir
            Kolyshkin <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a moz-do-not-send="true"
                href="mailto:kir@openvz.org" target="_blank">kir@openvz.org</a>&gt;</span>:<br>
            <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
              .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
              <div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
                <div class="">
                  <div>On 03/02/2014 02:01 PM, spameden wrote:<br>
                  </div>
                  <blockquote type="cite">
                    <div dir="ltr"><br>
                      <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
                        <br>
                        <div class="gmail_quote">2014-03-03 0:38
                          GMT+04:00 Ola Lundqvist <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a
                              moz-do-not-send="true"
                              href="mailto:ola@inguza.com"
                              target="_blank">ola@inguza.com</a>&gt;</span>:<br>
                          <blockquote class="gmail_quote"
                            style="margin:0px 0px 0px
                            0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
                            rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
                            <div dir="ltr">Hi
                              <div><br>
                              </div>
                              <div>Problem fixed now.</div>
                              <div>I had fixed the problem temporarily,
                                but I had forgotten to upgrade to the
                                debarchiver version with the fix so it
                                will not happen again. Now I have done
                                the upgrade and fixed the problem
                                properly.</div>
                            </div>
                          </blockquote>
                          <div><br>
                          </div>
                          <div>I think it's not fixed properly:<br>
                            <br>
                          </div>
                          <div>1) wrong version of linux-image:<br>
                          </div>
                          <div># dpkg -l|grep linux-image-openvz<br>
                          </div>
                          <div>ii&nbsp;
                            linux-image-openvz-amd64&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
                            042+1&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; amd64&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
                            OpenVZ Linux kernel (meta-package) <br>
                            <br>
                          </div>
                          <div>2) # ls /boot |grep openvz<br>
                            config-2.6.32-openvz-042stab084.17-amd64<br>
                            <b>config-2.6.32-openvz-amd64</b><br>
                            initrd.img-2.6.32-openvz-042stab084.17-amd64<br>
                            <b>initrd.img-2.6.32-openvz-amd64</b><br>
                            System.map-2.6.32-openvz-042stab084.17-amd64<br>
                            <b>System.map-2.6.32-openvz-amd64</b><br>
                            vmlinuz-2.6.32-openvz-042stab084.17-amd64<br>
                            <b>vmlinuz-2.6.32-openvz-amd64</b><br>
                            <br>
                          </div>
                          <div>so now we are missing usual version here
                            in the package.. that's actually very bad
                            ... can you look into it?<br>
                            <br>
                          </div>
                          <div>many thanks.<br>
                          </div>
                        </div>
                      </div>
                    </div>
                  </blockquote>
                  <br>
                </div>
                This is intentional, and I changed it after looking into
                how default Debian kernel is packaged/versioned.<br>
                <br>
                If you take a look, they have [meta]package
                linux-image-amd64 which requires<br>
                package linux-image-3.2.0-4-amd64. The latter
                (currently) has a version of<br>
                3.2.54-2 and this version is changed (incremented) with
                every release, while<br>
                package name stays the same (linux-image-3.2.0-4-amd64).
                Also, vzkernel<br>
                name stays the same -- it is /boot/vmlinuz-3.2.0-4-amd64
                in different versions.<br>
                I am using the very same approach now for OpenVZ
                kernels.<br>
              </div>
            </blockquote>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div>I understand your position. I checked how it's done in
              Debian and yes you're right, they're using this scheme for
              their mainline 3.2.0-4 kernel.<br>
              <br>
            </div>
            <div>Tbh, I don't like their "NEW" way at all. <br>
            </div>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div>Here is why:<br>
            </div>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div>When new version of OpenVZ kernel comes its hard to
              have 2 different kernels on the system (with different
              versions).<br>
              <br>
            </div>
            <div>Here is a simple scenario:<br>
              <br>
            </div>
            <div>1) new kernel comes and it's not working at all on
              certain configurations. <br>
              <br>
              2) if you configured grub correctly it would boot
              previously working kernel after reboot.<br>
            </div>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div>--&gt; But it wont boot previous OpenVZ kernel version,
              because when you upgrade you overwrite existing kernel and
              you need to rollback to the previous version manually.<br>
            </div>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
              .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
              <div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"> <br>
                Previously I was adding the VZ version (i.e.
                042stab0xy.z) into kernel package name,<br>
                and it was added to vmlinuz and the /lib/modules
                directory name as well. </div>
            </blockquote>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div>I really liked how it was done before.&nbsp; There was an
              option to leave certain kernel versions for testing as
              well and delete what is not needed.<br>
              &nbsp;<br>
            </div>
            <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
              .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
              <div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">The problem<br>
                is, you need to specify a different dependency in
                linux-image-openvz-amd64 metapackage,<br>
                and apt-get upgrade complains that it can't upgrade the
                system since a new version<br>
                of an installed package (linux-image-amd64) requires a
                package that is not installed yet.<br>
                The problem could be fixed by running dist-upgrade, but
                eventually I decided that<br>
                this message is a hint that I package openvz kernels
                improperly, that lead me to<br>
                looking into a way standard Debian kernels are packaged
                and implementing it<br>
                the same way for OpenVZ kernels.<br>
              </div>
            </blockquote>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div>Interesting.. I never seen myself such problem before.
              It worked just fine for me for a long time (before there
              was a problem with chksums). <br>
            </div>
          </div>
        </div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
    The error from apt-get update was something like this<br>
    (sorry I don't have exact message):<br>
    <br>
    "Some packages can not be updated, because they require other<br>
    packages that are not installed on your system. You might use<br>
    apt-get dist-upgrade to work around that"<br>
    <br>
    So I started to look why this is not happening with stock Debian
    kernels<br>
    and found out that I was doing it all wrong (or so I thought at that
    time).<br>
    <br>
    We can surely revert back to the old packaging scheme...<br>
    <br>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CAHCALeyxqLTRLn-37W8e3FdQet7OJRCybbGE2WTRNaWBk4Umgg@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">
      <div dir="ltr">
        <div class="gmail_extra">
          <div class="gmail_quote">
            <div>
              <br>
            </div>
            <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
              .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
              <div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"> <br>
                I am not a Debian guru and am very open to suggestions
                on how to improve this.<br>
                Perhaps we can return to the older versioning scheme and
                ask people to use dist-upgrade.<br>
                Or maybe I am totally missing something. Please help.<span
                  class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
                  </font></span></div>
            </blockquote>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div>Yes, old way was really cool and convinient personally
              for me on production environment. And for testing new
              stable kernel versions too.<br>
              <br>
            </div>
            <div>Of course there is a drawback that you need to cleanup
              old kernel versions manually, cuz your /boot partition
              must have some free space for future upgrades.<br>
              <br>
            </div>
            <div>If OpenVZ kernels are very well tested before going to
              stable versions I wouldnt mind NEW way. It's probably more
              proper to have just 1 OpenVZ kernel version and update it
              from time to time..<br>
            </div>
          </div>
        </div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
    This is what we do with stable kernels -- they are released about
    once a month,<br>
    and we test a lot before releasing those. But yeah, maybe we should
    just revert<br>
    back to the old scheme.<br>
  </body>
</html>