Thanks. I'll wait for the i386 bits to land as well. On 5/28/13 3:07 PM, "Milamber" <milam...@apache.org> wrote:
>Hello Chiradeep, > >Please note, haproxy has been backported in Debian Wheezy (7.0): >http://lists.debian.org/debian-backports-changes/2013/05/msg00050.html >http://packages.debian.org/wheezy-backports/haproxy > >Milamber > >Le 11/05/2013 01:14, Chiradeep Vittal a ecrit : >> Fixed by fetching haproxy 1.4.8-1 from squeeze-backports >> >> On 5/9/13 4:16 PM, "Sheng Yang" <sh...@yasker.org> wrote: >> >>> Don't know. We can use Ubuntu package for now if it possible. >>> >>> or just use sid packages if possible? >>> >>> dnsmasq version is 0.62, which is good enough for ipv6. >>> >>> --Sheng >>> >>> >>> On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 4:04 PM, Chiradeep Vittal < >>> chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com> wrote: >>> >>>> How old? When did it disappear? >>>> >>>> I propose using the Ubuntu package. >>>> In tools/appliance/definitions/systemvmtemplate/postinstall.sh >>>> >>>> wget >>>> >>>> >>>>http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/pool/main/h/haproxy/haproxy_1.4.18-0u >>>>bu >>>> nt >>>> u2.1_i386.deb >>>> >>>> dpkg -i haproxy_1.4.18-0ubuntu2.1_i386.deb >>>> >>>> Also do we know if the system vm template contains the version of >>>> dnsmasq >>>> that is known to work for ipv6 support? >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Chiradeep >>>> >>>> On 5/9/13 3:48 PM, "Sheng Yang" <sh...@yasker.org> wrote: >>>> >>>>> No idea. Probably we should just grab some old generated systemvm for >>>> now. >>>>> --Sheng >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 3:37 PM, Chiradeep Vittal < >>>>> chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Should we use the Ubuntu package for now? >>>>>> >>>>>> On 5/9/13 2:03 PM, "Sheng Yang" <sh...@yasker.org> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> HAproxy is missing in Debian 7.0's repo, due to old maintainer is >>>>>> missing. >>>>>>> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=674447 >>>>>>> http://lists.debian.org/debian-qa/2013/04/msg00039.html >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The new maintainer took over it at Apr 20th, but there is no >>>> schedule >>>>>> of >>>>>>> recovering yet. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> That's why depends on everyday generated systemvm template is >>>>>> dangerous. >>>>>>> --Sheng >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 12:09 AM, Rohit Yadav <bhais...@apache.org> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 11:45 AM, Abhinandan Prateek < >>>>>>>> agneya2...@hotmail.com >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> The haproxy and port map services are not installed on VMWare >>>>>> system >>>>>>>> VM >>>>>>>>> template. Is the path used to create the templates different for >>>>>>>> different >>>>>>>>> Hypervisor templates ? I was under the assumption that the >>>> services >>>>>>>>> installed on all the system VM templates meant for different >>>>>>>> hypervisors >>>>>>>>> should be same ? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> No? Pl. see tools/appliance/systemvmtemplate/postinstall.sh, if >>>> it's >>>>>>>> there >>>>>>>> those pkgs will be installed. >>>>>>>> For the template I created, I had built it with veewee on my >>>> system >>>>>> and >>>>>>>> then imported it in vmware fusion to install the vmware-tools. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Cheers. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -abhi >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >> >
