danb35
Hall of Famer
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2011
- Messages
- 15,504
I think the issue is two-fold. The first, and more obvious, issue is that I also use the VirtualBox jail, having a Windows 7 VM running inside it. I probably should just go ahead and migrate it to my Proxmox host, but that's inherently a bit of a hassle, and Windows activation makes it more of one. In addition, my jails are on an SSD, so that VM is pretty snappy now, while the Proxmox host is on spinning rust.
But the second part is, IMO, the bigger issue, and this isn't the first time something like this has happened. We have what should be a minor maintenance release that's making significant changes, and doing so without any warning at all to the user (there wasn't even anything in the changelog for 9.10.1-U1 about VirtualBox). In this case, it's removing a feature, but other cases I remember are a wholesale replacement of the iSCSI target (though we at least got some warning about that one, IIRC) and a fairly-major Samba change, both between 9.2.1.x subversions. This isn't the way that other STABLE release branches work. CentOS 6, for example, is still using PHP 5.3.3, because that's what it first shipped with; they do the same with other major packages in that distribution. They're backporting security patches, but keeping the same versions (incrementing release numbers, of course). That's what people expect from "stable" server software--that it will continue to behave in the same way until you do a major upgrade. Upgrading from 9 to 10, of course there will be big changes. From 9.2 to 9.3, yeah, you're going to see something. But in going from 9.2.1.5 to 9.2.1.6 (or from 9.10.1 to 9.10.1-U1), the only behavior changes you should see are fixed bugs. And that just doesn't seem to be the release philosophy of the dev team.
But the second part is, IMO, the bigger issue, and this isn't the first time something like this has happened. We have what should be a minor maintenance release that's making significant changes, and doing so without any warning at all to the user (there wasn't even anything in the changelog for 9.10.1-U1 about VirtualBox). In this case, it's removing a feature, but other cases I remember are a wholesale replacement of the iSCSI target (though we at least got some warning about that one, IIRC) and a fairly-major Samba change, both between 9.2.1.x subversions. This isn't the way that other STABLE release branches work. CentOS 6, for example, is still using PHP 5.3.3, because that's what it first shipped with; they do the same with other major packages in that distribution. They're backporting security patches, but keeping the same versions (incrementing release numbers, of course). That's what people expect from "stable" server software--that it will continue to behave in the same way until you do a major upgrade. Upgrading from 9 to 10, of course there will be big changes. From 9.2 to 9.3, yeah, you're going to see something. But in going from 9.2.1.5 to 9.2.1.6 (or from 9.10.1 to 9.10.1-U1), the only behavior changes you should see are fixed bugs. And that just doesn't seem to be the release philosophy of the dev team.