This is now done. http://s.apache.org/wy
On 5/28/13 3:35 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal" <chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com> wrote: >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_1.4.18-0 >>>>>u >>>>>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 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>> >> >
