1 |
Okay, in that case, extend the vserver herd to include a larger range of |
2 |
virtualization stuff, including Xen, Bochs, and so on. It just seems |
3 |
more fitting to group those packages together. |
4 |
On Mon, 2006-07-03 at 21:48 +0200, Benedikt Böhm wrote: |
5 |
> On Monday 03 July 2006 19:49, Nick Devito wrote: |
6 |
> > Looking at the number of virtualization-related packages (xen, openvz, |
7 |
> > and related packages) that are in portage, and the increasing complexity |
8 |
> > of these packages (which means more problems, as usual), I'm suggesting |
9 |
> > that a Virtualization herd be formed to handle these packages. I was |
10 |
> > also going to suggest moving virtualization-related things out of |
11 |
> > app-emulation, since they don't quite fit the bill of "emulation". Maybe |
12 |
> > QEMU, Bochs, and VMWare would fit, but, not quite. These are the |
13 |
> > packages that would be affected: |
14 |
> > |
15 |
> > * Xen/Xen-tools |
16 |
> > * QEMU |
17 |
> > * OpenVZ |
18 |
> > * Bochs |
19 |
> > * VMWare (workstation, server, etc) |
20 |
> > * User-mode Linux |
21 |
> > |
22 |
> > ..and the list goes on... |
23 |
> |
24 |
> the packages related to OS-level virtualization (OpenVZ, Linux-VServer) are |
25 |
> already in the vserver herd |
26 |
> |
27 |
> > |
28 |
> > Just a suggestion :) |
29 |
> > |
30 |
> > ~ Nick |
31 |
|
32 |
-- |
33 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |