1715664131 J * Ghislain ~ghislain@adsl2.aqueos.com
1715705471 J * torrunes ~trs@193.69.63.206
1715705757 M * torrunes Bertl: I just wonder - is there a chance there will be a newer patch for >=5 kernels this year? There was some talk about some possible funding to make that happen, but it seems it might not?
1715707482 M * Bertl there is a chance, but no guarantee
1715708860 M * torrunes hehe, would like like to quantify ? Like 1% or 40% or whatever ? :)
1715708868 M * torrunes hehe, would you like like to quantify ? Like 1% or 40% or whatever ? :)
1715708990 M * Bertl actually it is not that bad, I've been planning to update the patches to a newer kernel for quite some while (for personal use) but for various reasons that never happened
1715709022 M * Bertl what I'm not sure at the moment is what and how much functionality will be there
1715709053 M * Bertl e.g. does network isolation still make sense? it
1715709084 M * Bertl is a lot of work and rather intrusive and there are nice solutions available with network namespaces already
1715709130 M * Bertl is the accounting stuff still relevant?
1715712365 M * Guy- fwiw, network isolation is very useful and can only be approximated using the namespace stuff; but for me personally, vserver with its bus factor of one was untenable and I've already moved to LXC (which came with some usability compromises, but better that than running very outdated kernels)
1715721599 M * Hurga I've been contemplating to move to proxmox, but it's good to hear that there might be more releases in the future :)  I was very happy with it for, how long is it, 20 years...
1715722293 M * Guy- only about 18 for me :)
1715723343 M * gnarface personally if there were an updated patch i'd prefer no functionality changed... for example i don't think i understand the network isolation well enough to improve upon it, and i'd be wary that if it changed to something else it might increase risk in unknown ways
1715723379 M * gnarface (the only reason i really even would need an updated patch is because inevitably something else i'm using will eventually no longer be able to run on a the 4.x kernel i'm using currently)
1715723417 M * gnarface exactly how it works now seems to be perfect for me... as far as i can tell
1715723460 M * gnarface ... although granted i'm hardly an expert at the internal stuff
1715723477 M * gnarface nobody has been able to bust in, and i know they've been trying :)
1715723614 M * gnarface and the only person i ever talked to who didn't like how the network isolation worked was a manager who formed that opinion without understanding it or even basic networking at all at first, then grudgingly walked it back 
1715723653 M * gnarface (after extensive and pedantic testing on his part)
1715723672 M * gnarface heh, anyway. hi everyone. glad to see you're not all dead. 
1715723675 M * gnarface :)
1715723682 M * gnarface this channel has been quiet for a long while...
1715723775 M * gnarface no rush on the new patch IMO... quality is a higher priority than speed for me ATM
1715724201 Q * Ghislain 
1715724473 M * Hurga gnarface: well the project has been stable. It works fine for me, I don't need more featores, didn't enounter bugs. So what can you say :)
1715724954 M * gnarface yea, it's perfect as-is IMO. i really lament that i couldn't bring it to the masses with that last business endeavor (which failed because i hitched my wagon to the wrong horse)
1715725013 M * gnarface i was really hoping to be able to contribute some meaningful amount of funding to the project :(
1715725238 M * Bertl gnarface: happens! and hi!
1715725278 M * gnarface o/