Stefan,

I have to agree with Henrik regarding the logic seeming backwards, but I
suppose that's because the "solution" hurt me.

Did Serge Hallyn ever take a look at it?  I got the impression someone
was going to try to backport part of the fix, but it sounds like that
path was rejected.

Regarding the Maverick and Natty backport kernels, I had the problem Kai
had (the Maverick backport was broken and it took a MONTH to fix, which
is not what I consider "fully supported") along with issues with drivers
for my video card and LCD display.  I haven't looked for or tried an
Oneiric backport kernel yet, but at this point I'm definitely leery.

The main source of frustration comes from the sense that Canonical
deliberately introduced a regression (disabling a kernel feature that
had previously been enabled) to avoid a potential regression
(backporting the fix) and the workaround of using a backport kernel
would have been fine except that it wasn't.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/790863

Title:
  Unable to start lxc container after update to 2.6.32-32

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/790863/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

Reply via email to