Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.debian.kernel > #59430
| From | Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.debian.kernel |
| Subject | Re: Possibilities for a special Azure or cloud Linux package |
| Date | 2017-11-18 02:50 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <uN0qB-4lQ-1@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <uMQKB-6U7-7@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] - view raw
On Fri, 2017-11-17 at 16:07 +0100, Bastian Blank wrote: > Hi kernel team > > We at credativ are responsible for maintaining the Azure cloud images. > We got asked by Microsoft to explore the possibilities of introducing a > specialised Linux image for this plattform into Debian. The main > enhancements we look at would be: > - faster boot of the instance, > - smaller memory footprint of the running kernel, and > - new features. We've spent the last decade slowly moving away from platform-specific to generic multiplatform kernels on ARM (and, to a lesser extent, x86). I strongly disagree with adding a new flavour that would be specific to one vendor's platform. However, if it is possible to create a single flavour that provides those sorts of enhancements for multiple cloud platforms, I think that would be worthwhile. > We don't want to introduce a new source package as was done for > grsecurity. This may work, as Microsoft mainly targets the latest > kernel, which is not always nice. > > That's why I would like to add such an image as a featureset to the main > Linux package. This will allow us to look at the downsides of the > approach in terms of maintenance overhead, build time, archive space > etc. If it does not work: disabling a featureset is easy. > > As first step we will not add patches, so the only thing that can break > is the config. But just in case I'll propose the following rules for > patches: > - must be in Linus tree, > - must be in a subsystem maintainers tree, or > - are in linux-next (not sure about this one). Those are basically the same criteria we normally use, so I don't understand your desire to add a featureset. Ben. > Would it be okay with you if we try this? Do you see other problem with > such an approach? > > Bastian > -- Ben Hutchings Teamwork is essential - it allows you to blame someone else.
Back to linux.debian.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Possibilities for a special Azure or cloud Linux package Bastian Blank <waldi@debian.org> - 2017-11-17 16:30 +0100
Re: Possibilities for a special Azure or cloud Linux package Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> - 2017-11-18 02:50 +0100
Re: Possibilities for a special Azure or cloud Linux package Bastian Blank <waldi@debian.org> - 2017-11-18 11:40 +0100
Re: Possibilities for a special Azure or cloud Linux package Bastian Blank <waldi@debian.org> - 2017-12-15 20:30 +0100
Re: Possibilities for a special Azure or cloud Linux package Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> - 2017-12-18 00:50 +0100
Re: Possibilities for a special Azure or cloud Linux package Noah Meyerhans <noahm@debian.org> - 2017-12-18 04:50 +0100
csiph-web