OpenVZ Forum


Home » General » Support » vzpkgcache centos-4-i386-default no longer work
Re: vzpkgcache centos-4-i386-default no longer work (vztmpl dead?) [message #31414 is a reply to message #31285] Fri, 27 June 2008 17:16 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
steve is currently offline  steve
Messages: 25
Registered: June 2007
Location: Orange County, California
Junior Member
dowdle wrote on Mon, 23 June 2008 22:09


vztmpl packages haven't really been keeping up with newer distributions. In fact, there are only a small handful of them and not an official package for CentOS 5, although if you search the OpenVZ forums hard enough you'll find one made by a guy name Steve (that I helped test).

Using vzpkgcache and vzyum and the lack of newer vztmpl packages has caused this method of creating OS Templates to fall out of favor with some of us.



OK, I'm the guy, Steve, who put the vztmpl package together for CentOS 5 that works properly by keeping the unnecessary udev package from entering the fray. I believe that the problem might have been corrected in the kernel by adding the "CONFIG_LEGACY_PTYS" option in the config (http://bugzilla.openvz.org/show_bug.cgi?id=578). However, it is obvious that at some point this method will no longer be possible. The vzrpm and vzyum utilities are already known not to work with Python 2.5 (most likely will be in RHEL 6) or x64 host node OS installs.

What I'm wondering is why this method of creating OS Templates is apparently falling out of favor with the development team. As I see it, centralized patch management, which this encourages, makes OpenVZ more of an enterprise-level system. It also encourages the easiest method to create templates for various new rpm-based distros. Turning away from this approach makes the project appear less relevant in the fast-moving world of OS Virtualization.

Seeing how intimately involved the developers of this project are with Linux kernel development, I'm wondering if they know something that we don't. Is the integration of this kind of container virtualization into the Linux kernel so close that it makes this sort of exercise no longer needed?
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: Contolling the number of CPU cores used per VE
Next Topic: Is name based forwarding possible on LAN
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Thu Aug 01 14:19:00 GMT 2024

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.02863 seconds