The xapi issue is fixed now. Next on the list:
- The mysql root passwordless access is broken. - Add additional network card. On Sat, Feb 1, 2014 at 9:16 PM, chris snow <chsnow...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks for the feedback Sebastien, it's much appreciated. > > I'll investigate in more detail over the next few days... > > On Sat, Feb 1, 2014 at 9:06 PM, Sebastien Goasguen <run...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Feb 1, 2014, at 4:03 PM, Sebastien Goasguen <run...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> On Jan 31, 2014, at 12:25 PM, chris snow <chsnow...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> I finally got the packer built devcloud box to boot with vagrant, but >>>> running 'xe vm-list' in it results in: >>>> >>>> Error: Connection refused (calling connect ) >>>> >>>> I'm going to do some more investigation, but could take a while as I >>>> get to learn xen. >>>> >>>> To make things easy while working on this I've created a github project >>>> here [2] >>>> >>> >>> I cloned it, the packer builds works and the vagrant export as well. >>> I was able to vagrant up/ssh. >>> >>> I noticed couple things. >>> >>> 1-the Xen setup. Check Rohit's blog http://bhaisaab.org he has a section on >>> DIY Devcloud, where he shows how to setup Xen, namely xapi toolstack and >>> creating a echo plugin.I think that's what you are missing, you can >>> probably add this to your posinstall script >>> >>> 2-We switched master to java 7, so you should switch to openjdk-7 >>> >>> 3- you might be missing a mysql-python-connector package and you should >>> setup the mysql password as null (for dev). >>> >> >> One more. It looks like there is only one interface (NAT), probably need to >> play with the pressed.cfg to add a host only interface: >> https://github.com/snowch/devcloud/blob/master/http/preseed.cfg >> >>> This is looking quite nice :) >>> >>>> I've added the problem above as an issue on github. >>>> >>>> --- >>>> [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/XenServer/VirtualBox#Installing_XCP >>>> [2] https://github.com/snowch/devcloud >>>> >>>> On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 7:18 AM, Rohit Yadav <rohit.ya...@citrix.com> >>>> wrote: >>>>> On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 4:14 AM, Sebastien Goasguen <run...@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On Jan 29, 2014, at 1:57 PM, chris snow <chsnow...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> I have started thinking about some options: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 1) use packer to convert the devcloud2 veewee definition as a starting >>>>>>> point >>>>>>> 2) create devcloud3 from scratch >>>>>>> 3) start with an existing packer definition (e.g. [1]) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Do you have a view on which option may be most suitable? >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> My view would be to start from scratch but of course looking at what has >>>>>> been done. >>>>>> >>>>>> In an ideal world, I would love to see a packer/vagrant file that would >>>>>> do: >>>>>> >>>>>> -Ubuntu and CentOS >>>>>> -Xen and KVM >>>>>> >>>>>> That way we can decide on what to build. Of course there might be issues >>>>>> due to the PV/HVM support in vbox and the OS chosen. >>>>>> I don't recall what the issue was that made Rohit use Debian (but see >>>>>> http://bhaisaab.org/logs/devcloud/), but ideally it would be good to use >>>>>> stock ubuntu 12.04 or 13.04 >>>>> >>>>> DevCloud is just an appliance that facilitates a virtual host >>>>> (hypervisor) for development with CloudStack. So, I chose Debian >>>>> because well it's the best in terms of packages, stability, security >>>>> and is usually rock solid. Ubuntu at the time had a networking issue >>>>> that did not let me use xenbr0 for use over host-only network, I did >>>>> not invest much time on it but rather switched to Debian. >>>>> >>>>> I suggest we stick to Debian as it would be least painful for anyone >>>>> IMO and the problem we're trying to solve is to enable developers have >>>>> a robust (possibly multi-vm) hypervisor host in box (vm) over a >>>>> desktop virtualization platform (virtualbox, kvm etc.) >>>>> >>>>> (IMHO -- I wonder if you've tried latest rock-solid Fedora 20, Ubuntu >>>>> should have been least recommended distro by now don't use it please). >>>>> >>>>>> I list 13.04 because there seems to be an issue with libvirt in 12.04 in >>>>>> the case that you want ceph >>>>>> (http://ceph.com/docs/master/rbd/rbd-cloudstack/). Of course ceph on a >>>>>> single node does not make sense, but for a devcloud3 setup we could >>>>>> imagine setting up ceph in it and use it as primary storage. >>>>> >>>>> Why not build libvirt version we want? In case we want to stay updated >>>>> I can help you with Fedora 20 based base or Arch based base for >>>>> devcloud. I've been using Fedora for some months now and I guess if >>>>> someone want latest and greatest but want to avoid a lot of sysadmin >>>>> work as with Arch Linux just go with Fedora. Linux users (new and old) >>>>> have more or less been inclined to Debian because yum-based distros >>>>> were in really bad shape few years ago and that's when like others I >>>>> shifted to using Ubuntu. But it's not the case anymore and Ubuntu has >>>>> tons of problems now and rpm-based distros deserver one shot. >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I mention KVM because if one uses VMware workstation than KVM would be >>>>>> an option. >>>>>> >>>>>> What I am doing these days is taking a veewee bare definition and using >>>>>> veewee-to-packer to get started with packer. I install chef/salt/puppet >>>>>> agents in the image so that I can use the 3 of them if I want to. >>>>>> >>>>>>> If we go with option 2 or 3, do you think debian 7.0 should be used as >>>>>>> a starting point, or another version such as 7.2 or 7.3? Or even >>>>>>> another distro? >>>>> >>>>> Feel free to choose whatever distro gives us all the tools and whatnot >>>>> to solve our problem. Distros and tools are not the problem having a >>>>> host in a box for CloudStack development is the problem. >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Are these goals still valid for devcloud3? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - Two network interfaces, host-only adapter so that the VM is >>>>>>> reachable from host os and a NAT so VMs can access Internet. >>>>> >>>>> This I guess will be most appreciated and useful for developers, >>>>> probably first time users and for demo. Last time for some reason, I >>>>> was unable to have Internet reach VMs inside DevCloud. >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Yes >>>>>> >>>>>>> - Can be used both as an all in one box solution like the original >>>>>>> DevCloud but the mgmt server and other services can run elsewhere (on >>>>>>> host os). >>>>> >>>>> This already works with last DevCloud. >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Yes >>>>>> >>>>>>> - Reduce resource requirements, so one could run it in 1G limit. >>>>> >>>>> +1 though I think size is not a major issue and reduce image size is a >>>>> good to have thing. >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Would be great, but remember that systemvm and ttylinux will run within >>>>>> it, so those 4 alone may use 1G >>>>>> >>>>>>> - Allow multiple DevCloud VMs hosts. >>>>> >>>>> +1 >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> That would be great. Having some skeleton for multiple devcloud hosts in >>>>>> a vagrant file so we can deploy "full" clouds. >>>>>> >>>>>>> - x86 dom0 and xen-i386 so it runs on all host os. >>>>>>> - Reduce exported appliance (ova) file size. >>>>>>> - It should be seamless, it should work out of the box. >>>>> >>>>> +1 >>>>> >>>>> Chris, appreciate you taking time working on this. >>>>> >>>>> Regards. >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> yes >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Are there any new requirements in addition to the ones discussed in >>>>>>> this email chain, e.g. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - vagrant support (in addition to the ova/ovf image) >>>>>>> - packer and vagrant build environment >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> In simstack https://github.com/runseb/simstack I am trying to provide >>>>>> chef/salt/puppet recipes for the install. So in devcloud3, I would lay >>>>>> things out so that we can also do those 3 cfg mgt system in the future. >>>>>> Note that simstack is not devcloud as I am trying to run the simulator >>>>>> and have to compile from source because there is no simulator package. >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Many thanks, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Chris >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [1] https://github.com/opscode/bento/tree/master/packer >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 2:25 PM, Sebastien Goasguen <run...@gmail.com> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Jan 29, 2014, at 8:49 AM, Rohit Yadav <bhais...@apache.org> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thanks for stepping in. That is much needed, in fact I think we should >>>>>>>>> use something like packer alongwith vagrant/veewee for both devcloud >>>>>>>>> and systemvmtemplate. Veewee can build vms, packer can export them to >>>>>>>>> various platforms/formats and a developer could use vagrant for local >>>>>>>>> devcloud/host automation. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I looked into it the other day and I agree we need to revamp this. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> veewee development and maintenance is going to stop. So we need to >>>>>>>> prep a packer version >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> So yes we should create a packer definition for devcloud3 :) and be >>>>>>>> able to post-process it to vagrant. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Regards. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 1:30 AM, chris snow <chsnow...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> I would like to build the devcloud2 image [1] from scratch using >>>>>>>>>> veewee (or packer) and turn it into a vagrant box. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> There seems to be several versions of Vagrant files and veewee >>>>>>>>>> definitions in the code base, making it difficult to know which one >>>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>> start from, or whether they are still valid. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Many thanks, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Chris >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> [1] http://bhaisaab.org/logs/devcloud/ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Check out my professional profile and connect with me on LinkedIn. >>>>>>> http://lnkd.in/cw5k69 >>>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Check out my professional profile and connect with me on LinkedIn. >>>> http://lnkd.in/cw5k69 >>> >> > > > > -- > Check out my professional profile and connect with me on LinkedIn. > http://lnkd.in/cw5k69 -- Check out my professional profile and connect with me on LinkedIn. http://lnkd.in/cw5k69
