Weekly Edition
Return to the Distributions page
| |||||||||||||||||||
Bits from the Debian kernel team
The Debian Kernel team recently had a series of face to face meetings during the Linux Plumbers Conference [1]. The DPL managed to arrange for the whole team to be present in Oregon at the same time, a representative of the release team was also present. The LPC conference venue allowed the kernel team to interact with the upstream developers and other distributions kernel teams in an positive and productive way. The Debian kernel team meetings ran over four days and covered a large number of topics, the abridged minutes are presented here, the full meeting minutes are also available [2]. Co-operation and version synchronisation with other distributions ----------------------------------------------------------------- This discussion involved timing of the Debian freeze and what implications this might have on the kernel version selected for squeeze. The version selected by other distributions was also discussed. In conclusion the 2.6.32 release will probably be the initial kernel version shipped with squeeze. Separate firmware, what is left to do? -------------------------------------- A constructive discussion was held about the outstanding firmware issues, how the team addresses them and how we might work with upstream to address our DSFG issues with kernel sources. Kernel Mode Setting transition ------------------------------ It was resolved that KMS will be enabled at build time but disabled at run time by default. The X packages will be able to use modprobe config files to enable KMS at run time as required. Feature patches --------------- These are patches the Debian kernels have for major features which are not upstream. openvz ++++++ Debian will continue to support this system with assistance from the openvz developers. rt patchset +++++++++++ This is apparently not ready for production use and will not be present in Debian kernels. vserver +++++++ This feature will be present in squeeze but will be marked as deprecated and a migration path to Linux containers investigated. xen dom 0 +++++++++ This feature will be included in the squeeze kernel release subject to ongoing stabilisation work. The feature will be marked as deprecated and will not appear in future releases. IDE to libata decision ---------------------- Debian will perform this transition using the udev packages in a similar way to Ubuntu. The Ubuntu developers have offered their assistance with this transition. preemption ---------- This feature will be enabled for the squeeze release. OSS --- This has been a deprecated kernel interface for some time and will be disabled for squeeze with mechanisms put in place to deal with legacy users. bug triage and tagging ---------------------- The kernel team has a large number of bugs, many of which contain inadequate information. The team decided that a policy for bugs and patches will be produced and enforced. We will also be improving the bug reporting by improving the reportbug usage. Moving the Debian Kernel packaging to Git ----------------------------------------- A robust discussion happened with several views and ideas expressed. The final outcome was that the team as a whole favoured the move to git and that further investigation and implementation would occur. Coordination with release team and D-I -------------------------------------- Several issues were covered the main item from this session was an investigation as to if udeb generation should be merged with the main kernel source package. Out of tree modules ------------------- After some discussion it was resolved to remove linux-modules-extra and -nonfree as they are an impossible to support properly. A few modules the project really must have will be placed directly into the linux-2.6 source The kernel team will endorse the use of dkms as a way for out-of-tree module maintainers to get their modules auto-built. Leveraging upstream .deb building --------------------------------- This became a discussion about the general kernel packaging and how we might use the upstream provided facilities better. There was some discussion we have way too many ways to build a kernel. We will be rationalising this to two methods, an upstream merged "make deb-pkg" target and the linux-2.6 Debian source. We will also be rationalising the kernel postinst and co-ordinating our efforts with the Ubuntu developers. New lists to co-ordinate ------------------------ There is a mailing list which we might resurrect for general distribution co-ordination kernel-packagers@vger.org And a list the Debian kernel team might want to join to co-ordinate with Ubuntu kernel-team@lists.ubuntu.com Debug Packages -------------- This refers to debugging information from current packages, not a separate configuration, useful for crash tools. This will be investigated further. Automated build and test ------------------------ This might be a useful tool in the future and work is ongoing. Experimental ------------ Some upload experimental uploads of the 2.6.31 version will be made. [1] http://linuxplumbersconf.org/2009/ [2] http://lists.debian.org/debian-kernel/2009/10/msg00613.html (Log in to post comments)
VServer Posted Oct 20, 2009 1:20 UTC (Tue) by dskoll (subscriber, #1630) [Link]
I'm sad they're deprecating VServer. We use it quite a bit as a lightweight virtualization tool where total isolation isn't required. It's a lot more convenient and stable than KVM.
VServer => openvz Posted Oct 20, 2009 1:34 UTC (Tue) by gwolf (subscriber, #14632) [Link]
I am also a vserver user/fan, and do not overly like the idea of this forceful (well, mid-term forceful) change. However, do not despair openvz provides a similar feature set to that of vserver, and migrating to it should not be _too_ painful.
VServer => openvz Posted Oct 20, 2009 1:36 UTC (Tue) by dskoll (subscriber, #1630) [Link]
I've never used OpenVZ. How is its performance? One of the things I liked about vserver was the very small performance penalty. VServer is more like BSD's "jail" than real virtualization, and that's all we need. Anything heavier doesn't do us any good, but just hurts performance.
VServer => openvz Posted Oct 20, 2009 2:01 UTC (Tue) by gwolf (subscriber, #14632) [Link]
I have neither used openvz, but was pointed at it by Micah Anderson (who maintains vserver in Debian) - It works basically the same way, creating compartments/containers inside a single running kernel. So performance-wise it should be quite close. But anything I say is mere speculation.
VServer => openvz Posted Oct 20, 2009 2:07 UTC (Tue) by jello (subscriber, #6083) [Link]
I haven't used VServer, but use OpenVZ extensively. They're both containers, not full-on virtualization. OpenVZ is a bit fiddly to get set up initially while you mess with the various knobs, but it's been very reliable and performant. I haven't done detailed benchmarks, but I'd say performance is about equal to bare-metal.
VServer => openvz Posted Oct 20, 2009 15:05 UTC (Tue) by dskoll (subscriber, #1630) [Link]
Thanks. I shall be investigating OpenVZ.
VServer => openvz Posted Oct 20, 2009 2:44 UTC (Tue) by BenHutchings (subscriber, #37955) [Link]
The problem with VServer is that no-one upstream or in Debian seems to be able to commit to supporting it on our stable kernel. Xen has the same problem (and anyone using Xen on lenny can probably see that it is already in trouble). We want to make this clear to users rather than letting them think they will be as well supported as the other kernel packages.
VServer Posted Jun 15, 2010 21:03 UTC (Tue) by matthewdarwin (subscriber, #67664) [Link]
Has anyone tried vserver on squeeze (testing). I use it on lenny but I want to migrate to squeeze soon...
BSD Posted Oct 20, 2009 1:35 UTC (Tue) by ncm (subscriber, #165) [Link]
Still no mention on LWN of officially supported Debian GNU/FreeBSD. That
must be one whopper of an article you're all working on. No hurry, get it right. :-)
BSD Posted Oct 20, 2009 3:57 UTC (Tue) by jake (editor, #205) [Link]
> Still no mention on LWN of officially supported Debian GNU/FreeBSD.
umm, does this count?
http://lwn.net/Articles/329556/
jake
BSD Posted Oct 20, 2009 8:03 UTC (Tue) by tajyrink (subscriber, #2750) [Link]
Good point, and something that always is a bit of a problem when Linux is used as a so broad term instead of free software. As we approach the situation where the kernel - kFreeBSD, Linux, Solaris - is just one interchangeable component like choosing between GNOME and KDE, it becomes a bit of a burden to have "Linux" in the name of so many aspects.
Linux used to be The Revolutionary Thing, but in the end the revolution was really the free/libre software, and Linux is just possibly the brightest star of it.
On the other hand, it's not that huge a problem - there are always situations where the historical name is more of a brand, a memory instead of being a precise term. And the Linux presents a bit more pragmatic brand than the more idealistic free software, though I strongly advocate the latter myself because it's so easy to go to wrong direction in case the idealism is forgotten by too many.
BSD Posted Oct 20, 2009 4:02 UTC (Tue) by bronson (subscriber, #4806) [Link]
Maybe you'll find that whopper of an article on Gnu Weekly News or FreeBSD Weekly News?
BSD Posted Oct 20, 2009 13:34 UTC (Tue) by Klavs (subscriber, #10563) [Link]
well - AFAIK LWN is no longer Linux Weekly News - it's just LWN - so the news is more about Open Source in general (and as such BSD as well).
FSCWN Posted Oct 20, 2009 15:00 UTC (Tue) by knobunc (subscriber, #4678) [Link]
Yeah... the FAQ says "LWN.net aims to be the premier news and information source for the free software community."
But someone needs to tell Tux that the text he is sitting on in the logo in the upper left ("Linux info from the source") is wrong ;-)
FSCWN Posted Oct 21, 2009 6:55 UTC (Wed) by efexis (guest, #26355) [Link] I'm sure Linux & BSD folk learn a lot from each other, and that that's represented in the code, and where license and politics allow, some cross code use probably also exists. You don't get to be open and pure, that's just another benefit of open source :-)
FSCWN Posted Oct 21, 2009 18:08 UTC (Wed) by ncm (subscriber, #165) [Link]
... or of Free Software, as the case may be.
|
|||||||||||||||||||