[PVE-User] Problem with Centos 5.X virtio ethernet drivers and last PVE updates

[Roland]

i see that my centos 5.11 VM should have support for virtio (see below)
and according to https://access.redhat.com/articles/2488201 rhel/centos
supports this since 5.3.

so if virtio worked before a proxmox update,  then i would call this a
regression.

can you tell which proxmox version worked for you with virtio ?

i tested centos 5.11 installer on my older pve 6.0-4 (5.0.15-1-pve
kernel) , but it does not find virtual disks.

roland

[root at hr-neu ~]# uname -aLinux hr-neu 2.6.18-398.el5 #1 SMP Tue Sep 16
20:50:52 EDT 2014 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux


[root at centos5 ~]# cat /etc/redhat-release
CentOS release 5.11 (Final)
[root at centos5 ~]# rpm -q kernel --changelog|grep virtio|grep 446214
- [xen] virtio: include headers in kernel-headers package (Eduardo
Pereira Habkost ) [446214]
- [xen] virtio: add PV network and block drivers for KVM (Mark
McLoughlin ) [446214]
- [xen] virtio: include headers in kernel-headers package (Eduardo
Pereira Habkost ) [446214]
- [xen] virtio: add PV network and block drivers for KVM (Mark
McLoughlin ) [446214]

Am 23.07.20 um 10:22 schrieb richard lucassen:
> On Tue, 21 Jul 2020 11:06:27 +0200
> Michael Rasmussen via pve-user <pve-user at lists.proxmox.com> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 21 Jul 2020 10:41:54 +0200
>> richard lucassen <mailinglists at lucassen.org> wrote:
>>
>>> network. There is definitly something wrong somewhere.
>>>
>> The only thing wrong here is that you a running a version of
>> RHEL/CentOS which is in maintenance support 2. This means there will
>> be no more updates except critical bugs. As of March 31, 2017 it is
>> considered in deep freeze!
> I know. But sometimes you need to keep an old version and a good way to
> handle this is to run such an old version in a virtual environment.
> A vhost supplies virtual hardware and apparently this virtual hardware
> has changed. This is not A Good Thing IMHO.
>
> It runs well under subversion 27 of the pve kernel but has stopped
> under version 30. So I think this is a bug as I do not expect design
> changes between subversion 27 and 30.
>
> R.
>