Can you update the documentation in confluence https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Build+Your+Own+SystemVM+Templates to reflect what's required now. Its woefully short on information, and links don't work anymore.
Kind regards, Paul Angus paul.an...@shapeblue.com www.shapeblue.com 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK @shapeblue -----Original Message----- From: Rohit Yadav [mailto:rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com] Sent: 28 July 2017 20:30 To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Move to Debian9 systemvmtemplate I think we can move to packer once we can get the Debian9 based systemvmtemplate to work. I think we should focus on doing this first and then focus on migration to a new build system as a next step. I spent some time today and with some help from veewee authors, I could get a base template up and running: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/2211 The above PR branch is pushed on ASF remote and allows for cross-collaboration with all ACS committers. Please collaborate with me on this and feel free to push changes on the branch as separate commits and/or make changes to the PR. Thanks. - Rohit ________________________________ From: Tim Mackey <tmac...@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, July 28, 2017 3:59:36 AM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Move to Debian9 systemvmtemplate Syed, I did a bunch of work on XenServer with Packer [1] before leaving Citrix. My stuff works rather well and was tested with XS 6.2, 6.5 and 7. It shouldn't be hard to validate with newest XS and updated Packer - I just lack the infra to do the testing. [1] https://github.com/xenserverarmy/packer -tim rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com www.shapeblue.com 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK @shapeblue On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Syed Ahmed <sah...@cloudops.com> wrote: > -1 on Arch as well. Moving to Debian 9 seems the wiser choice IMO. > I've used Packer before and I really like it, the only downside that I > see is that Packer lacks support for XenServer VHD images. There is > some work on a XenServer plugin but I haven't tested that. If the > community decides to use Packer, I can do some initial validation of it on > XenServer. > > Thanks, > -Syed > > On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 3:19 AM, Wido den Hollander <w...@widodh.nl> > wrote: > > > > > > Op 24 juli 2017 om 19:07 schreef Rene Moser <m...@renemoser.net>: > > > > > > > > > Hi Rohit > > > > > > > > > On 07/23/2017 06:08 PM, Rohit Yadav wrote: > > > > All, > > > > > > > > > > > > Just want to kick an initial discussion around migration to > > > > Debian9 > > based systemvmtemplate, and get your feedback on the same. > > > > > > > > Here's a work-in-progress PR: https://github.com/apache/ > > cloudstack/pull/2198 > > > > > > Have you considered to replace veewee by packer? > > > > > > > Packer is really nice indeed. We use it to build our templates [0] > > which we use on CloudStack. > > > > Building the SSVM using Packer should be rather easy I think. > > > > [0]: https://github.com/pcextreme/packer-templates > > > > > Our friends from schubergphilis have already done some work here > > > https://github.com/MissionCriticalCloud/systemvm-packer. > > > > > > However there would be also an official way to convert the > > > definitions https://www.packer.io/guides/veewee-to-packer.html > > > > > > Regards René > > >
