1348444968 Q * fisted_ Quit: brb 1348444977 J * fisted ~fisted@xdsl-84-44-223-221.netcologne.de 1348444977 Q * fisted Write error: connection closed 1348445324 J * thierryp ~thierry@zouk.inria.fr 1348445374 J * fisted ~fisted@xdsl-84-44-223-221.netcologne.de 1348445509 Q * fisted 1348445808 Q * thierryp Ping timeout: 480 seconds 1348446456 J * fisted ~fisted@xdsl-84-44-223-221.netcologne.de 1348446928 Q * bergerx_ Ping timeout: 480 seconds 1348448761 J * bergerx ~bergerx@bdgn.net 1348449557 J * tpollard ~tpollard@59.167.220.45 1348450000 M * tpollard Hi, is it possible to run a vserver guest inside of another guest. (IE: Physical host -> Virtual Host -> Guest) 1348450018 M * Bertl not at the moment 1348450037 M * tpollard Bertl, Thanks, I guessed that was the case, but wanted to confirm. 1348450111 M * Bertl np 1348450200 Q * tpollard Quit: So long and thanks for all the fish 1348452178 J * clopez ~clopez@17.28.165.83.dynamic.mundo-r.com 1348452179 Q * bergerx Remote host closed the connection 1348452193 J * bergerx ~bergerx@46.155.77.221 1348452505 Q * cuba33ci Remote host closed the connection 1348452541 J * cuba33ci ~cuba33ci@114-36-240-40.dynamic.hinet.net 1348452559 J * thierryp ~thierry@zouk.inria.fr 1348452625 J * thierryp_ ~thierry@zouk.inria.fr 1348452625 Q * thierryp Read error: Connection reset by peer 1348452734 Q * thierryp_ Remote host closed the connection 1348453098 Q * bergerx Read error: Connection reset by peer 1348455358 J * bergerx ~bergerx@46.196.204.19 1348459007 J * bergerx_ ~bergerx@46.196.204.19 1348459100 Q * bergerx Ping timeout: 480 seconds 1348459657 Q * Aiken Read error: Operation timed out 1348460506 Q * sannes Remote host closed the connection 1348460652 J * sannes ~ace@cm-84.211.87.28.getinternet.no 1348461174 Q * sannes Remote host closed the connection 1348461874 Q * clopez Ping timeout: 480 seconds 1348463295 J * Aiken ~Aiken@2001:44b8:2168:1000:21f:d0ff:fed6:d63f 1348466499 Q * ensc|w Remote host closed the connection 1348466511 J * ensc|w ~ensc@www.sigma-chemnitz.de 1348466614 M * Bertl off to bed now ... have a good one everyone! 1348466618 N * Bertl Bertl_zZ 1348467473 Q * jeroen__ Quit: Ex-Chat 1348467685 J * jeroen__ ~jeroen@mail.nl02.searchtrends.eu 1348472765 J * kir ~kir@swsoft-msk-nat.sw.ru 1348474695 J * ghislain ~AQUEOS@adsl2.aqueos.com 1348474889 J * BenG ~bengreen@212.183.128.82 1348476229 J * BlackPanx 4d6f0224@ircip1.mibbit.com 1348476414 M * BlackPanx Latest kernel panic i faced, any idea on why would that happen: http://shrani.si/f/R/8N/33VG9Vws/vs006-kernel-panic.png ? I will upgrade kernel to 3.0.* since these seem to be more stable... at least at first look, but still... for the sake of curiosity. 1348476453 M * Wonka I'd like a newer vserver kernel package in debian... 1348476478 M * BlackPanx as far as i can tell this is daniel_hozac's kernel with nodelayacct on. 1348476536 M * Wonka if I wasn't on vacation currently with only my notebook, but could test around a bit, I'd maybe even start a wiki page about what's still missing in LXC to replace the vserver patch 1348476538 M * BlackPanx Wonka compile it :) you can get SPEC file from default kernel precompiled for debian, then just get appropriate vserver patch, use same options as previous kernel and compile. 1348476579 M * Wonka well, does the patch apply to 3.2.$current? 1348476588 M * BlackPanx it's not easy as apt-get update but okay. 1348476598 M * BlackPanx i do believe so. i have seen repository for debian with 3.2 1348476599 M * BlackPanx wait 1348476603 M * BlackPanx let me find it. 1348476617 M * BenG repo.psand.net 1348476626 M * BlackPanx yes 1348476628 M * BlackPanx that one 1348476630 M * BlackPanx from beng 1348476635 M * BlackPanx :) 1348476644 M * BlackPanx it has latest kernels with vserver patch 1348476652 M * BlackPanx and as far as i can tell from words of other people 1348476658 M * BlackPanx it's really stable 1348476660 M * BlackPanx ... 1348476666 M * BlackPanx no crashing and stuff like that 1348476675 M * BlackPanx so thumbs up on beng for that 1348476685 M * BlackPanx i'm trying to use these kernels on my ubuntu 1348476697 M * BlackPanx and so far one server is in production for testing 1348476700 M * BlackPanx if this works fine 1348476712 M * BenG its purely the main line kernel, vserver patch, with as close to debian config as possible 1348476747 M * BlackPanx i found few changes, especially with dm_mod , needed to load this module, otherwise servers dont recognise LVM 1348476751 M * BlackPanx and labels 1348476753 M * BlackPanx etc. 1348476783 P * kir PONG :charm.oftc.net 1348476796 J * fisted_ ~fisted@xdsl-87-78-143-199.netcologne.de 1348476817 M * BlackPanx BenG ever thought of making one for ubuntu too ? :) but i guess it's same vanilla kernel and debian's kernel can be used on ubuntu too... 1348476819 M * BlackPanx hopefully 1348476833 M * BlackPanx still testing stuff, before i put our main databases on this kernel... 1348476859 M * BenG well there shouldn't be any issues, I'd probably go for the wheezy images rather than the squeeze ones 1348476883 M * BenG compiling for debian is part of my job, but ubuntu isn't 1348476899 M * BlackPanx okay... 1348476908 M * BlackPanx vs102 ~ $ cat /etc/*version: squeeze/sid 1348476909 M * BenG but its mostly automated, and theres always a benefit to more testing 1348476913 M * BlackPanx ubuntu has this squeeze 1348476920 M * BenG okay 1348476929 M * BlackPanx so i just took the squeeze one 1348476935 M * BlackPanx on one of the servers 1348476960 M * BlackPanx currently working properly, but i should include it on some more problematic server... 1348476983 M * BlackPanx so far looking good, and your repository is my last resort in sorting out strange crashes 1348476990 M * BlackPanx that we are facing currently 1348477012 M * BenG I'll see if I can build ubuntu package creation into my job, but its a fair chore, since there's a new ubuntu out every 6 months 1348477039 M * BenG for people running ubuntu on the server, do they tend to stick to the LTS releases? 1348477049 M * BenG do you BlackPanx ? 1348477070 M * BlackPanx no problem beng, if it's a problem... i just thought... cause many people use ubuntu for servers, they have many repositories for all sorts of apps... at least we find it very useful for some specific servers 1348477081 M * BlackPanx yes. even ubuntu wants you to use LTS 1348477090 M * BenG okay 1348477095 M * BlackPanx they always tell you that when you come to channels for support 1348477099 M * BenG well that wouldn't be too tricky then 1348477108 M * BenG I'll see what they say 1348477119 M * BlackPanx they dont even offer support to non LTS mainly... they first tell you to upgrade to LTS 1348477122 M * BlackPanx but yes we have all LTS 1348477125 M * BlackPanx servers 1348477125 M * Wonka well, Linux 3.2 is LTS :) 1348477130 M * BlackPanx true 1348477162 Q * fisted Ping timeout: 480 seconds 1348477175 M * BlackPanx there is one repository for ubuntu vserver, but it's really non-updated... -.- that's the problem 1348477226 M * BlackPanx either way LTS is the only way... :) 1348477370 M * BlackPanx we tried kernels from ubuntu's repository for vserver but they all crash unfortunately. 1348477378 M * BlackPanx at least latest ones... 1348477456 M * BlackPanx Anyone can get few minutes to check: http://shrani.si/f/R/8N/33VG9Vws/vs006-kernel-panic.png if there's anything useful why would this crash happen? (CentOS) 1348477732 M * daniel_hozac you're missing the most interesting part of it. 1348477747 M * daniel_hozac but it doesn't look vserver-related at all. 1348477838 M * BlackPanx i see 1348477843 M * BlackPanx the interesting part is ? 1348477849 M * BlackPanx on the end or beginning ? 1348477866 M * daniel_hozac before that 1348477892 M * BenG for those servers BlackPanx a mainline kernel is a much better idea 1348477905 M * BenG an up-to-date one at that 1348477959 M * BenG there are many obscure cheap consumer fixing patches in the Ubuntu kernels to make it great 1348477971 M * BenG but on big rack servers they often fail 1348477999 M * BenG note BlackPanx that you can use Debian as the host and Ubuntu as the guest, if you wish 1348478151 M * BlackPanx daniel_hozac thanks dani. 1348478211 M * BlackPanx BenG i know that, but i have hosts on ubuntu :( and not really easy to reinstall into debian now... with databases of 500GB size... i mean that would be real pain. 1348478273 M * daniel_hozac surely /vservers is its own partition? 1348478291 M * BlackPanx they have all own partitions 1348478302 M * BlackPanx usually main databases have own lvm's 1348478305 M * daniel_hozac then reinstalling the host shouldn't affect anything on it. 1348478365 M * BlackPanx sorta... 1348478680 Q * BenG Ping timeout: 480 seconds 1348479275 J * BenG ~bengreen@212.183.128.2 1348480871 Q * BenG Ping timeout: 480 seconds 1348483687 J * clopez ~clopez@17.28.165.83.dynamic.mundo-r.com 1348483740 M * Wonka w/win 48 1348484320 J * ju ~ju@curl.eatmytux.com 1348484323 M * ju hi 1348484492 M * ju I have a (probably) recurrent question: is vservers more secure than lxc? Apparently this one has serious problems with the use of root in containers... Could we say that vservers is once and for all more serious? 1348484764 M * BlackPanx more secure... define that. 1348484797 N * Bertl_zZ Bertl 1348484802 M * Bertl morning folks! 1348484807 M * BlackPanx morning bertl 1348484809 M * BlackPanx :) 1348484892 M * ju BlackPanx: with vservers, could I permit an anonymous to be root inside a container without fears for the others? 1348484898 M * Bertl ju: well, Linux-VServer is around since 2001 and for 10 years we are designing for a potential hostile environment where the guest gives 'root access' to a 'customer' 1348484957 M * Bertl so it has all kind of resource limits and fine tuned permission control to allow for a safe isolation 1348485037 M * BlackPanx ju if you are so scared, why dont you turn to full virtualization then ? that way client can not harm host at all... you must know that client can still crash host's kernel from guest in vserver. 1348485044 M * BlackPanx since it runs on same kernel... 1348485054 M * ju Bertl: nice :). so, cloud we say that lxc will never as safe as vservers? because it's not its way 1348485097 M * Bertl I'm not sure, I got the impression that LXC strives to become a complete and safe solution like Linux-VServer 1348485115 M * Bertl it's just that the development there goes slowly as it seems 1348485402 M * ju Bertl: so for you, the security aspect of the use of containers is a target of its development? when lxc will be as safe as vservers, this will be the retirement of the vservers project? 1348485475 M * Bertl at least of the kernel patches, yes 1348485518 M * ju ok :) 1348485550 J * uranus ~uranus@62.152.161.117 1348485557 Q * uranus Read error: Connection reset by peer 1348485633 M * ju thanx you 1348485801 M * Bertl you're welcome! 1348486332 Q * ju Quit: leaving 1348486347 J * ju ~ju@curl.eatmytux.com 1348486356 M * Bertl wb ju! :) 1348486376 M * ju hey! ^^ 1348487992 M * ghislain bertl: what i like here is that you have the experience and follow the KISS principle. I allways choose solution that lean toward KISS even if this is complex having this principle in mind is rare those days 1348488217 M * Bertl thanks! 1348491651 M * ghislain i really think this is the raod to follow ^^ 1348494645 M * Bertl off for a nap ... bbl 1348494654 N * Bertl Bertl_zZ 1348497683 Q * ensc|w Remote host closed the connection 1348497843 J * ensc|w ~ensc@www.sigma-chemnitz.de 1348500525 Q * BlackPanx Quit: http://www.mibbit.com ajax IRC Client 1348502776 J * bonbons ~bonbons@2001:960:7ab:0:d8af:dfe5:3474:d425 1348503800 J * nkukard ~nkukard@41.177.82.178 1348505245 J * ncopa_ ~ncopa@ti0143a340-0216.bb.online.no 1348505260 J * derjohn_mob ~aj@d046253.adsl.hansenet.de 1348505608 Q * ncopa Ping timeout: 480 seconds 1348506680 Q * derjohn_mob Ping timeout: 480 seconds 1348513123 M * Jb_boin as for now, using lxc for vps/vds is not the best way to go but if its only to make appliances/separate daemons from each others and/or from the host its a good choice and it doesnt requires to have a specifically patched kernel so it really depends on your needs 1348513523 Q * guerby Read error: No route to host 1348513545 J * guerby ~guerby@nc10d-ipv6.tetaneutral.net 1348514385 N * Bertl_zZ Bertl 1348514390 M * Bertl back now ... 1348514416 M * Bertl Jb_boin: except you need (lightweight) network isolation 1348514429 M * Bertl s/except/unless/ 1348514464 M * Jb_boin yep 1348514498 M * Jb_boin or if you need to run daemons/tools from different distributions without too much separation its also a good choice 1348514574 M * Bertl sure, Linux-VServer is basically using the same kernel mechanisms in a recent kernel as LXC 1348514592 M * Bertl (and LXC is, as you said, already in mainline) 1348519295 J * derjohn_mob ~aj@d046253.adsl.hansenet.de 1348519487 Q * ju Ping timeout: 480 seconds 1348520010 Q * bonbons Quit: Leaving 1348521388 J * derjohn_foo ~aj@d063048.adsl.hansenet.de 1348521471 J * fisted ~fisted@xdsl-84-44-236-227.netcologne.de 1348521616 Q * derjohn_mob Read error: Operation timed out 1348521890 Q * fisted_ Ping timeout: 480 seconds 1348522937 M * Bertl daniel_hozac: you around? got a minute? 1348523118 Q * ghislain Quit: Leaving. 1348525258 Q * derjohn_foo Ping timeout: 480 seconds 1348525467 M * Bertl okay, off for another nap ... bbl 1348525481 N * Bertl Bertl_zZ 1348526816 Q * ser Remote host closed the connection 1348529385 Q * jyryt Ping timeout: 480 seconds 1348529672 J * tolkor ~rj@tdream.lly.earlham.edu