On Wed, 22 Oct 2014, Tomas Pospisek wrote:
On Wed, 22 Oct 2014, Holger Levsen wrote:
ain't there a 5th option, providing an lxc 1.0.x backport for
wheezy [corrected - tpo]? u...@451f.org has one prepared on mentors.d.n
but I was reluctant to sponsor it (so far) as it was only 1.0.5-x,
while 1.0.6-1 just had hit sid...
But a backport should fix this issue, possible in combination with a newer
kernel from backports.
This seems like the best solution to me. Given that only a few months (how
many?) seem to be remaining until release - is it feasible in that time frame
to have 1.0.6-3 migrate from unstable to tesing and at the same time have it
either included in an lxc point release for wheezy or in wheezy-backports?
What do you think about this solution Daniel?
On Wed, 22 Oct 2014, Daniel Baumann wrote:
if someone wants to do the work for that, sure.
So, dear u...@451f.org - what do you think about that idea? Would it be a lot
of work/feasible to backport 1.0.6-3 to wheezy? Would 1.0.6-3-wheezy have
some other dependencies that'd need to be backported, such as some kernel
feature as Holger proposed?
*t
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
