On 03/07/2014 06:21 PM, spameden wrote:
Btw, Kir, there is no version anymore in uname -a.

Could you fix this at least to display current version, e.g. instead of:

# uname -r
2.6.32-openvz-amd64

display:
# uname -r
2.6.32-openvz-042stab084.17-amd64

Again, it is the same as in stock Debian kernel. While their version is 3.2.54-2,
uname shows 3.2.0-4.


and also consider reverting to the old system if you can..


Yeah, I guess I should do it, just waiting for someone who knows Debian
more than me to chime in.



2014-03-07 18:45 GMT+04:00 Narcis Garcia <informat...@actiu.net <mailto:informat...@actiu.net>>:

    I think that is a good strategy to have a main package to be manually
    installed:
    linux-image-openvz-amd64
    linux-image-openvz-686

    But fully versioned as its dependencies (042stab084.26)
    And with a dependency to a version-named package, such as:
    linux-image-2.6.32-42.84.26-openvz-amd64

    In this way, upgrading the main package this will install the new
    versions of dependencies. I think that this is the way Debian
    works, and
    this allows to have old and new files installed simultaneously.

    To have the old and new kernels allow to test new one before removing
    old one.


    El 07/03/14 02:28, Kir Kolyshkin ha escrit:
    > On 03/02/2014 02:01 PM, spameden wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> 2014-03-03 0:38 GMT+04:00 Ola Lundqvist <o...@inguza.com
    <mailto:o...@inguza.com>
    >> <mailto:o...@inguza.com <mailto:o...@inguza.com>>>:
    >>
    >>     Hi
    >>
    >>     Problem fixed now.
    >>     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.
    >>
    >>
    >> I think it's not fixed properly:
    >>
    >> 1) wrong version of linux-image:
    >> # dpkg -l|grep linux-image-openvz
    >> ii  linux-image-openvz-amd64
    >> 042+1                         amd64        OpenVZ Linux kernel
    >> (meta-package)
    >>
    >> 2) # ls /boot |grep openvz
    >> config-2.6.32-openvz-042stab084.17-amd64
    >> *config-2.6.32-openvz-amd64*
    >> initrd.img-2.6.32-openvz-042stab084.17-amd64
    >> *initrd.img-2.6.32-openvz-amd64*
    >> System.map-2.6.32-openvz-042stab084.17-amd64
    >> *System.map-2.6.32-openvz-amd64*
    >> vmlinuz-2.6.32-openvz-042stab084.17-amd64
    >> *vmlinuz-2.6.32-openvz-amd64*
    >>
    >> so now we are missing usual version here in the package.. that's
    >> actually very bad ... can you look into it?
    >>
    >> many thanks.
    >
    > This is intentional, and I changed it after looking into how default
    > Debian kernel is packaged/versioned.
    >
    > If you take a look, they have [meta]package linux-image-amd64
    which requires
    > package linux-image-3.2.0-4-amd64. The latter (currently) has a
    version of
    > 3.2.54-2 and this version is changed (incremented) with every
    release, while
    > package name stays the same (linux-image-3.2.0-4-amd64). Also,
    vzkernel
    > name stays the same -- it is /boot/vmlinuz-3.2.0-4-amd64 in
    different
    > versions.
    > I am using the very same approach now for OpenVZ kernels.
    >
    > Previously I was adding the VZ version (i.e. 042stab0xy.z) into
    kernel
    > package name,
    > and it was added to vmlinuz and the /lib/modules directory name
    as well.
    > The problem
    > is, you need to specify a different dependency in
    > linux-image-openvz-amd64 metapackage,
    > and apt-get upgrade complains that it can't upgrade the system
    since a
    > new version
    > of an installed package (linux-image-amd64) requires a package
    that is
    > not installed yet.
    > The problem could be fixed by running dist-upgrade, but eventually I
    > decided that
    > this message is a hint that I package openvz kernels improperly,
    that
    > lead me to
    > looking into a way standard Debian kernels are packaged and
    implementing it
    > the same way for OpenVZ kernels.
    >
    > I am not a Debian guru and am very open to suggestions on how to
    improve
    > this.
    > Perhaps we can return to the older versioning scheme and ask
    people to
    > use dist-upgrade.
    > Or maybe I am totally missing something. Please help.
    >
    > Kir.
    >
    >
    >
    > _______________________________________________
    > Users mailing list
    > Users@openvz.org <mailto:Users@openvz.org>
    > https://lists.openvz.org/mailman/listinfo/users
    >
    _______________________________________________
    Users mailing list
    Users@openvz.org <mailto:Users@openvz.org>
    https://lists.openvz.org/mailman/listinfo/users




_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users@openvz.org
https://lists.openvz.org/mailman/listinfo/users

_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users@openvz.org
https://lists.openvz.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Reply via email to