[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1638: CLOUDSTACK-9456: Migrate master to Spring 4.x

[blueorangutan]

Github user blueorangutan commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1638
  
Trillian test result (trillian-pr1638-46-kvm-centos68-cs410): 
Test completed. 45 look ok, 7 have errors

Test | Result | Time
--- | --- | ---
test_01_updatevolumedetail | Success | 0.093
test_DeployVmAntiAffinityGroup_in_project | Success | 211.941
test_DeployVmAntiAffinityGroup | Success | 146.346
test_router_dhcphosts | Success | 297.713
test_deploy_vgpu_enabled_vm | Skipped | 0.003
test_deploy_vm_from_iso | Success | 428.001
test_01_router_internal_basic | Success | 0.591
test_02_router_internal_adv | Success | 1.076
test_03_restart_network_cleanup | Success | 65.569
test_04_restart_network_wo_cleanup | Success | 5.720
test_05_router_basic | Success | 0.038
test_06_router_advanced | Success | 0.053
test_07_stop_router | Success | 10.167
test_08_start_router | Success | 35.294
test_09_reboot_router | Success | 40.346
test_00_deploy_vm_root_resize | Success | 252.993
test_01_deploy_vm_root_resize | Success | 6.346
test_02_deploy_vm_root_resize | Success | 6.428
test_deployvm_firstfit | Success | 60.741
test_deployvm_userconcentrated | Success | 85.930
test_deployvm_userdispersing | Success | 20.525
test_01_scale_vm | Skipped | 0.000
test_deployvm_userdata | Success | 60.675
test_deployvm_userdata_post | Success | 75.754
test_01_create_disk_offering | Success | 0.108
test_02_create_sparse_type_disk_offering | Success | 0.063
test_04_create_fat_type_disk_offering | Success | 0.058
test_02_edit_disk_offering | Success | 0.043
test_03_delete_disk_offering | Success | 0.032
test_01_sys_vm_start | Success | 0.144
test_02_sys_template_ready | Success | 0.089
test_default_role_deletion | Success | 6.325
test_role_account_acls | Success | 7.742
test_role_account_acls_multiple_mgmt_servers | Success | 7.844
test_role_inuse_deletion | Success | 6.219
test_role_lifecycle_create | Success | 6.406
test_role_lifecycle_delete | Success | 11.286
test_role_lifecycle_list | Success | 6.304
test_role_lifecycle_update | Success | 11.365
test_role_lifecycle_update_role_inuse | Success | 6.332
test_rolepermission_lifecycle_concurrent_updates | Success | 6.378
test_rolepermission_lifecycle_create | Success | 6.259
test_rolepermission_lifecycle_delete | Success | 6.224
test_rolepermission_lifecycle_list | Success | 6.440
test_rolepermission_lifecycle_update | Success | 6.598
test_UpdateConfigParamWithScope | Success | 0.141
test_01_create_service_offering | Success | 0.122
test_02_edit_service_offering | Success | 0.074
test_03_delete_service_offering | Success | 0.038
test_04_change_offering_small | Success | 244.533
ContextSuite context=TestDedicateGuestVlanRange>:setup | `Error` | 0.000
test_01_snapshot_root_disk | `Error` | 0.049
test_01_internallb_roundrobin_1VPC_3VM_HTTP_port80 | Success | 461.294
test_02_internallb_roundrobin_1RVPC_3VM_HTTP_port80 | Success | 523.954
test_03_vpc_internallb_haproxy_stats_on_all_interfaces | Success | 198.964
test_04_rvpc_internallb_haproxy_stats_on_all_interfaces | Success | 268.375
test_01_create_iso | Success | 66.332
test_02_edit_iso | Success | 0.077
test_03_delete_iso | Success | 95.185
test_04_extract_Iso | Success | 5.185
test_05_iso_permissions | Success | 0.055
test_06_copy_iso | Skipped | 0.000
test_07_list_default_iso | Success | 0.054
test_01_list_sec_storage_vm | Success | 0.117
test_02_list_cpvm_vm | Success | 0.103
test_03_ssvm_internals | Success | 3.609
test_04_cpvm_internals | Success | 1.492
test_05_stop_ssvm | Success | 134.049
test_06_stop_cpvm | Success | 131.927
test_07_reboot_ssvm | Success | 133.606
test_08_reboot_cpvm | Success | 161.697
test_09_destroy_ssvm | Success | 164.025
test_10_destroy_cpvm | Success | 131.972
ContextSuite context=TestListIdsParams>:setup | `Error` | 0.000
test_01_create_lb_rule_src_nat | Success | 240.073
test_02_create_lb_rule_non_nat | Success | 187.476
test_assign_and_removal_lb | Success | 133.929
test_static_role_account_acls | Skipped | 0.016
login_test_saml_user | Success | 21.564
test_nic_secondaryip_add_remove | Success | 192.990
test_01_create_template | Success | 80.674
test_CreateTemplateWithDuplicateName | Success | 120.955
test_02_edit_template | Success | 90.175
test_03_delete_template | Success | 5.103
test_04_extract_template | Success | 5.281
test_05_template_permissions | Success | 0.037
test_06_copy_template | Skipped | 0.000
test_07_list_public_templates | Success | 0.026
test_08_list_system_templates | Success | 0.021
test_network_acl | Success | 66.041
test_delete_account | Success | 268.020
test_01_port_fwd_on_src_nat | Success | 1

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1640: CLOUDSTACK-9458: Fix HA bug when VMs are stopped on ...

[marcaurele]

Github user marcaurele commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1640
  
@koushik-das 
> If the MS is not able to determine the state of the VM, it tries fencing 
off the VM (using the various fencers available). If VM cannot be fenced off 
successfully, the state of the VM is left unchanged. 

Apparently I found a way where the VMs are successfully fenced off even 
though they should not.

What is the reason to try fencing off VMs when the MS is not able to 
determine its state? I cannot see a good reason so far but you seem to think 
there is at least one. Can you explain it?

@jburwell It does not cover my case exactly as it's a timing issue. I'll 
keep a note to find a way to create a scenario.


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1646: [4.9/LTS] Add upgrade path from 4.9.0 to 4.9.1, chan...

[karuturi]

Github user karuturi commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1646
  
code LGTM


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1654: Updating pom.xml version numbers for release 4.8.2.0...

[blueorangutan]

Github user blueorangutan commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1654
  
Packaging result: ✔centos6 ✔centos7 ✔debian repo: 
http://packages.shapeblue.com/cloudstack/pr/1654
Job ID-98


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1623: CLOUDSTACK-9317: Enable/disable static NAT associate...

[blueorangutan]

Github user blueorangutan commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1623
  
Trillian test result (trillian-pr1623-38-vmware-55u3-cs48): 
Test completed. 37 look ok, 12 have errors

Test | Result | Time
--- | --- | ---
test_createRegion | Success | 0.035
test_DeployVmAntiAffinityGroup_in_project | Success | 267.303
test_01_router_internal_basic | Success | 0.606
test_02_router_internal_adv | Success | 1.027
test_03_restart_network_cleanup | Success | 140.944
test_04_restart_network_wo_cleanup | Success | 5.607
test_05_router_basic | Success | 0.029
test_06_router_advanced | Success | 0.046
test_07_stop_router | Success | 25.243
test_08_start_router | Success | 120.828
test_09_reboot_router | Success | 130.835
test_DeployVmAntiAffinityGroup | Success | 196.684
test_01_scale_vm | Skipped | 66.441
test_deploy_vgpu_enabled_vm | Skipped | 0.004
test_deploy_vm_from_iso | Success | 843.661
test_01_sys_vm_start | Success | 0.148
test_02_sys_template_ready | Success | 0.099
test_00_deploy_vm_root_resize | Success | 6.498
test_01_deploy_vm_root_resize | Success | 6.235
test_02_deploy_vm_root_resize | Success | 6.266
test_deployvm_firstfit | Success | 206.520
test_deployvm_userconcentrated | Success | 121.187
test_deployvm_userdispersing | Success | 55.752
test_01_create_service_offering | Success | 0.108
test_02_edit_service_offering | Success | 0.094
test_03_delete_service_offering | Success | 0.045
test_04_change_offering_small | Success | 97.309
test_deployvm_userdata | Success | 161.303
test_deployvm_userdata_post | Success | 20.425
test_01_create_disk_offering | Success | 0.113
test_02_create_sparse_type_disk_offering | Success | 0.075
test_04_create_fat_type_disk_offering | Success | 0.076
test_02_edit_disk_offering | Success | 0.048
test_03_delete_disk_offering | Success | 0.042
test_01_snapshot_root_disk | Success | 222.219
test_UpdateConfigParamWithScope | Success | 0.165
ContextSuite context=TestDedicateGuestVlanRange>:setup | `Error` | 0.000
test_01_list_sec_storage_vm | Success | 0.157
test_02_list_cpvm_vm | Success | 0.139
test_03_ssvm_internals | Success | 3.896
test_04_cpvm_internals | Success | 1.199
test_05_stop_ssvm | Success | 204.223
test_06_stop_cpvm | Success | 181.887
test_07_reboot_ssvm | Success | 158.813
test_08_reboot_cpvm | Success | 156.708
test_09_destroy_ssvm | Success | 233.966
test_10_destroy_cpvm | Success | 236.990
test_01_internallb_roundrobin_1VPC_3VM_HTTP_port80 | `Failure` | 441.264
test_02_internallb_roundrobin_1RVPC_3VM_HTTP_port80 | `Failure` | 546.859
test_03_vpc_internallb_haproxy_stats_on_all_interfaces | `Error` | 441.481
test_04_rvpc_internallb_haproxy_stats_on_all_interfaces | `Error` | 516.759
test_01_create_template | Success | 146.055
test_CreateTemplateWithDuplicateName | Success | 251.738
test_02_edit_template | Success | 90.149
test_03_delete_template | Success | 5.145
test_04_extract_template | Success | 10.191
test_05_template_permissions | Success | 0.040
test_06_copy_template | Skipped | 0.000
test_07_list_public_templates | Success | 0.025
test_08_list_system_templates | Success | 0.056
test_01_create_iso | Success | 66.332
test_02_edit_iso | Success | 0.126
test_03_delete_iso | Success | 95.195
test_04_extract_Iso | Success | 5.192
test_05_iso_permissions | Success | 0.048
test_06_copy_iso | Skipped | 0.000
test_07_list_default_iso | Success | 0.039
test_01_create_lb_rule_src_nat | Success | 187.843
test_02_create_lb_rule_non_nat | Success | 187.338
test_assign_and_removal_lb | Success | 133.652
login_test_saml_user | Success | 22.090
test_nic_secondaryip_add_remove | Success | 192.737
test_advZoneVirtualRouter | Success | 0.020
test_deploy_vm | Success | 0.018
test_deploy_vm_multiple | Success | 283.325
test_01_stop_vm | Success | 10.132
test_02_start_vm | Success | 20.214
test_03_reboot_vm | Success | 5.124
test_06_destroy_vm | Success | 5.108
test_07_restore_vm | Success | 0.102
test_08_migrate_vm | Success | 76.170
test_09_expunge_vm | Success | 125.236
test_10_attachAndDetach_iso | Success | 72.134
test_network_acl | Success | 201.902
test_delete_account | Success | 278.007
test_01_port_fwd_on_src_nat | Success | 111.800
test_02_port_fwd_on_non_src_nat | Success | 55.628
test_public_ip_admin_account | Success | 40.272
test_public_ip_user_account | Success | 10.259
test_reboot_router | Success | 625.125
test_releaseIP | Success | 238.215
test_network_rules_acquired_public_ip_1_static_nat_rule | Success | 124.311
test_network_rules_acquired_public_ip_2_nat_rule | Success | 61.609
test_network_rules_acquired_public_ip_3_Load_Balancer_Rule 

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1655: Fix ajaxviewer.js to solve console on Firefox

[lygutas]

GitHub user lygutas opened a pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1655

Fix ajaxviewer.js to solve console on Firefox

Mozilla Firefox displays white tile in place of cursor. The reason - 
function isImageLoaded() always returns true after first load and function 
checkUpdate() reloads too fast. 
Suggested fix - in refresh() method state imageLoaded should be reverted to 
false. This ensures that function checkUpdate() processes only when tile image 
is loaded.

You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:

$ git pull https://github.com/lygutas/cloudstack patch-1

Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch at:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1655.patch

To close this pull request, make a commit to your master/trunk branch
with (at least) the following in the commit message:

This closes #1655


commit 4be72489e2c4c0e290f6d151506e5019590b24ce
Author: Tomas Lygutas 
Date:   2016-08-23T07:44:41Z

Fix ajaxviewer.js to solve console on Firefox

Mozilla Firefox displays white tile in place of cursor. The reason - 
function isImageLoaded() always returns true after first load and function 
checkUpdate() reloads too fast. 
Suggested fix - in refresh() method state imageLoaded should be reverted to 
false. This ensures that function checkUpdate() processes only when tile image 
is loaded.




---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1656: CLOUDSTACK-9466: Fix fk constraint failure in...

[rhtyd]

GitHub user rhtyd opened a pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1656

CLOUDSTACK-9466: Fix fk constraint failure in upgrade path

In the 4.1.0-4.2.0 db upgrade path, it creates new tables to store secondary
(nfs) storage in image_store table and volumes in volume_store_ref table. In
the upgrade path, it first tries to migrate NFS storage pool where it 
excludes
storage pools which have been removed, but it migrates all the volumes 
without
checking if their storage pools have been removed. This causes fk constraint
failure as the volume/row being inserted refers to a storage pool which does
not exist in the image_store table.

The fix migrates all the nfs storage pools to image_store including removed
storage pools and in doing so migrates with the 'removed' field. This fixes
db upgrade for old pre-4.0 and 4.0/4.1 CloudStack clouds.

/cc @jburwell @PaulAngus @karuturi @abhinandanprateek @murali-reddy 

You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:

$ git pull https://github.com/shapeblue/cloudstack 4.9-fk410to420fix

Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch at:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1656.patch

To close this pull request, make a commit to your master/trunk branch
with (at least) the following in the commit message:

This closes #1656


commit 1b678cbcaaff29024ffa93c10a36954eaa874f6a
Author: Rohit Yadav 
Date:   2016-08-23T07:53:18Z

CLOUDSTACK-9466: Fix fk constraint failure in upgrade path

In the 4.1.0-4.2.0 db upgrade path, it creates new tables to store secondary
(nfs) storage in image_store table and volumes in volume_store_ref table. In
the upgrade path, it first tries to migrate NFS storage pool where it 
excludes
storage pools which have been removed, but it migrates all the volumes 
without
checking if their storage pools have been removed. This causes fk constraint
failure as the volume/row being inserted refers to a storage pool which does
not exist in the image_store table.

The fix migrates all the nfs storage pools to image_store including removed
storage pools and in doing so migrates with the 'removed' field. This fixes
db upgrade for old pre-4.0 and 4.0/4.1 CloudStack clouds.

Signed-off-by: Rohit Yadav 




---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1646: [4.9/LTS] Add upgrade path from 4.9.0 to 4.9.1, chan...

[rhtyd]

Github user rhtyd commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1646
  
@jburwell yes that and we can also verify from packages that the version is 
reflected in the pkg names.


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1646: [4.9/LTS] Add upgrade path from 4.9.0 to 4.9.1, chan...

[rhtyd]

Github user rhtyd commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1646
  
Given we've enough reviews and tests (Travis) passing, I'll go ahead merge 
this and merge this fwd to master. On master, I'll send another PR that changes 
code version to 4.10.0.0-SNAPSHOT.


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack-docs-admin issue #40: index.po and ui.po translated in FR

[lmrv]

Github user lmrv commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-docs-admin/pull/40
  
Hi Rajani, hi Milamber

My name is Antoine, I come from France.
I actually work on a CloudStack plateform.

I really miss a french translation of the admin doc, so I started to 
translate it.

I first discuss about it with Pierre-Luc Dion.

I have setup my dev environnement, get Transifex trad, and forked the 
project on github (https://github.com/lmrv/cloudstack-docs-admin/).

What I have notice :

- Pot files from Transifex are outdated with the github version of .rst.
- Master branch point to version 4.8 of the doc, not the 4.9.

I am motivated to work on french translation (enougth to write a mail in 
english ^^).
What do you think about it ? Do I have to continue ? Do I have to make 
pull request or only working on my own fork ?

Waiting for your instructions.

Regards

Antoine.


Le 23/08/2016 à 08:39, Rajani Karuturi a écrit :
>
> @milamber  can you take a look at this 
> please?
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub 
> 
,
 
> or mute the thread 
> 
.
>




---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1656: CLOUDSTACK-9466: Fix fk constraint failure in upgrad...

[rhtyd]

Github user rhtyd commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1656
  
@blueorangutan package


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1656: CLOUDSTACK-9466: Fix fk constraint failure in upgrad...

[blueorangutan]

Github user blueorangutan commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1656
  
@rhtyd a Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. I'll keep you 
posted as I make progress.


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1656: CLOUDSTACK-9466: Fix fk constraint failure in upgrad...

[blueorangutan]

Github user blueorangutan commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1656
  
Packaging result: ✔centos6 ✔centos7 ✔debian repo: 
http://packages.shapeblue.com/cloudstack/pr/1656
Job ID-99


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1646: [4.9/LTS] Add upgrade path from 4.9.0 to 4.9....

[asfgit]

Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1646


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1630: Add projectid to project details page

[asfgit]

Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1630


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1646: [4.9/LTS] Add upgrade path from 4.9.0 to 4.9.1, chan...

[blueorangutan]

Github user blueorangutan commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1646
  
@rhtyd a Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. I'll keep you 
posted as I make progress.


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1648: test/integration: fix tearDown order in list_acl_ te...

[rhtyd]

Github user rhtyd commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1648
  
@jburwell sure, looks like it failed again for one of the tests (failed to 
cleanup domain), I'll debug this.


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1648: test/integration: fix tearDown order in list_...

[rhtyd]

Github user rhtyd closed the pull request at:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1648


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1648: test/integration: fix tearDown order in list_...

[rhtyd]

GitHub user rhtyd reopened a pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1648

test/integration: fix tearDown order in list_acl_ tests

test/integration: fix tearDown order in list_acl_ tests

In several of the list_acl_tests, the tests run for simulator only where
in the (class) setup domains and accounts are created for the test. 
When the
tests end the (class) teardown methods would delete and remove these 
resources.
Due to dependence of one of the resources on the other, domain2 on 
domain1,
domain2 needs to be removed/cleaned up before domain1. Due to this 
issue,
several Travis test runs have failed in the past such as:

https://travis-ci.org/apache/cloudstack/jobs/152610967
https://travis-ci.org/apache/cloudstack/jobs/152610968

Changing the order of cleanup fixes the tests.


/cc @jburwell @karuturi 

The fix is specific to tests that run 'only' on simulator with Travis. A 
passing Travis run should be enough to validate the changes.

You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:

$ git pull https://github.com/shapeblue/cloudstack 4.9-fixmarvintest

Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch at:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1648.patch

To close this pull request, make a commit to your master/trunk branch
with (at least) the following in the commit message:

This closes #1648


commit a9acadda95c05a6af1f7c1ebf1dd2591479fd8ba
Author: Rohit Yadav 
Date:   2016-08-19T11:42:09Z

test/integration: fix tearDown order in list_acl_ tests

In several of the list_acl_tests, the tests run for simulator only where
in the (class) setup domains and accounts are created for the test. When the
tests end the (class) teardown methods would delete and remove these 
resources.
Due to dependence of one of the resources on the other, domain2 on domain1,
domain2 needs to be removed/cleaned up before domain1. Due to this issue,
several Travis test runs have failed in the past such as:

https://travis-ci.org/apache/cloudstack/jobs/152610967
https://travis-ci.org/apache/cloudstack/jobs/152610968

Changing the order of cleanup fixes the tests.

Signed-off-by: Rohit Yadav 




---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

Re: Compilation error "Execution cloudstack-checklicence of goal com.mycila:license-maven-plugin:2.11:check failed"

[Rohit Yadav]

Hi B,


This seems like a network issue to me, you may try changing networks and see if 
that works, or identify if there are any firewall policies in your network 
barring you to access those url resources.


Regards.


From: B Prakash 
Sent: 23 August 2016 10:22:45
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: Compilation error "Execution cloudstack-checklicence of goal 
com.mycila:license-maven-plugin:2.11:check failed"

Hi Rohit,  thank you!  I am using the main master branch.  I have all the 
latest files.  I am having this problem only since last few weeks, earlier my 
build was running fine.I tried this and I still have the same problem.  I 
will will install nonoss deps and try again, meanwhile, following is the build 
error I have now;



Downloaded: 
https://repo.maven.apache.org/maven2/org/apache/xmlrpc/xmlrpc-client/3.1.3/xmlrpc-client-3.1.3.jar
 (58 KB at 681.0 KB/sec)
Downloaded: 
https://repo.maven.apache.org/maven2/org/apache/xmlrpc/xmlrpc-common/3.1.3/xmlrpc-common-3.1.3.jar
 (107 KB at 1005.4 KB/sec)
Aug 22, 2016 9:15:13 PM 
org.apache.maven.wagon.providers.http.httpclient.impl.execchain.RetryExec 
execute
INFO: I/O exception (java.net.SocketException) caught when processing request 
to {s}->https://repo.maven.apache.org:443: Connection timed out
Aug 22, 2016 9:15:13 PM 
org.apache.maven.wagon.providers.http.httpclient.impl.execchain.RetryExec 
execute
INFO: Retrying request to {s}->https://repo.maven.apache.org:443
Aug 22, 2016 9:15:21 PM 
org.apache.maven.wagon.providers.http.httpclient.impl.execchain.RetryExec 
execute
INFO: I/O exception (java.net.SocketException) caught when processing request 
to {s}->https://repo.maven.apache.org:443: Connection timed out
Aug 22, 2016 9:15:21 PM 
org.apache.maven.wagon.providers.http.httpclient.impl.execchain.RetryExec 
execute
INFO: Retrying request to {s}->https://repo.maven.apache.org:443
Aug 22, 2016 9:30:55 PM 
org.apache.maven.wagon.providers.http.httpclient.impl.execchain.RetryExec 
execute
INFO: I/O exception (java.net.SocketException) caught when processing request 
to {s}->https://repo.maven.apache.org:443: No route to host
Aug 22, 2016 9:30:55 PM 
org.apache.maven.wagon.providers.http.httpclient.impl.execchain.RetryExec 
execute
INFO: Retrying request to {s}->https://repo.maven.apache.org:443
Aug 22, 2016 9:31:06 PM 
org.apache.maven.wagon.providers.http.httpclient.impl.execchain.RetryExec 
execute
INFO: I/O exception (java.net.SocketException) caught when processing request 
to {s}->https://repo.maven.apache.org:443: No route to host
Aug 22, 2016 9:31:06 PM 
org.apache.maven.wagon.providers.http.httpclient.impl.execchain.RetryExec 
execute
INFO: Retrying request to {s}->https://repo.maven.apache.org:443
Downloaded: 
https://repo.maven.apache.org/maven2/org/apache/ws/commons/util/ws-commons-util/1.0.2/ws-commons-util-1.0.2.jar
 (34 KB at 0.0 KB/sec)
Aug 22, 2016 9:46:47 PM 
org.apache.maven.wagon.providers.http.httpclient.impl.execchain.RetryExec 
execute
INFO: I/O exception (java.net.SocketException) caught when processing request 
to {s}->https://repo.maven.apache.org:443: Connection timed out
Aug 22, 2016 9:46:47 PM 
org.apache.maven.wagon.providers.http.httpclient.impl.execchain.RetryExec 
execute
INFO: Retrying request to {s}->https://repo.maven.apache.org:443


Thanks and regards,

 B Prakash



From: Rohit Yadav 
Sent: Monday, August 22, 2016 1:04 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: Compilation error "Execution cloudstack-checklicence of goal 
com.mycila:license-maven-plugin:2.11:check failed"

Hi B, how are you building CloudStack? Which branch is it?

Can you try a full clean build: mvn clean install -Dnoredist -Dsimulator -P 
developer,systemvm

You may install nonoss dependencies from here: 
https://github.com/rhtyd/cloudstack-nonoss
[https://avatars1.githubusercontent.com/u/95203?v=3&s=400]

GitHub - rhtyd/cloudstack-nonoss: Apache CloudStack - Non 
...
github.com
cloudstack-nonoss - Apache CloudStack - Non OSS libraries ... Clone with HTTPS 
Use Git or checkout with SVN using the web URL.





Regards.


From: B Prakash 
Sent: 22 August 2016 21:17:50
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Compilation error "Execution cloudstack-checklicence of goal 
com.mycila:license-maven-plugin:2.11:check failed"

Hi, I am unable to compile latest source due to the following error, please can 
someone help me with this?

[ERROR] Failed to execute goal com.mycila:license-maven-plugin:2.11:check 
(cloudstack-checklicence) on project cloud-plugin-network-nvp: Execution 
cloudstack-checklicence of goal com.mycila:license-maven-plugin:2.11:check 
failed: Plugin com.mycila:license-maven-plugin:2.11 or one of its dependencies 
could not be resolved: Could not transfer artifact 
javax.enterprise:cdi-api:jar:1.0 from/to central 
(https://repo.maven.apa

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1646: [4.9/LTS] Add upgrade path from 4.9.0 to 4.9.1, chan...

[blueorangutan]

Github user blueorangutan commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1646
  
Packaging result: ✔centos6 ✔centos7 ✔debian repo: 
http://packages.shapeblue.com/cloudstack/pr/1646
Job ID-100


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1646: [4.9/LTS] Add upgrade path from 4.9.0 to 4.9.1, chan...

[rhtyd]

Github user rhtyd commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1646
  
Fwd-merged this to master, with db version on master fixed during merge 
conflict to 4.10.0.0-SNAPSHOT, and db paths fixed as 4.9.0->4.9.1->4.10.0.


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1655: Fix ajaxviewer.js to solve console on Firefox

[rhtyd]

Github user rhtyd commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1655
  
LGTM. @lygutas can you share a screenshot, before/after?

@blueorangutan package


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1655: Fix ajaxviewer.js to solve console on Firefox

[blueorangutan]

Github user blueorangutan commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1655
  
@rhtyd a Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. I'll keep you 
posted as I make progress.


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1623: CLOUDSTACK-9317: Enable/disable static NAT associate...

[ProjectMoon]

Github user ProjectMoon commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1623
  
It's been amended and rebased. I still haven't had time to add a new DAO 
method to the IP address DAO. I can work on that now though. When is the RC 
being cut?


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1655: Fix ajaxviewer.js to solve console on Firefox

[blueorangutan]

Github user blueorangutan commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1655
  
Packaging result: ✔centos6 ✔centos7 ✔debian repo: 
http://packages.shapeblue.com/cloudstack/pr/1655
Job ID-101


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

Re: Eliminating Support for Ubuntu 12.04

[Rohit Yadav]

Historically, CloudStack's debian/deb packages/repositories have never been 
supported by the initial authors. For example, initial ACS version and all CCP 
releases never shipped deb packages, nor in our (old and recent) documentation 
we promote installation/running CloudStack on Debian/Ubuntu. Afaik, it was Wido 
who introduced it because he wanted to run CloudStack on Ubuntu/Debian-based 
distro. Also, the packages are something that the project never shipped or 
endorsed or supported, so it's up to the maintainers of various repositories 
how they are building and hosting CloudStack packages. Even if we remove the 
packaging support in our branch/repository, anyone can build CloudStack for any 
distro, several people/projects have packaging related buildsystem/code 
separated from the project codebase. Most tutorials that I found are based 
around Ubuntu 14.04 or CentOS, given that 12.04 is 4+ years old, we might not 
even have anyone using CloudStack on it.


That said -- I think 4.9 should at least not drop the support yet, just to let 
any Ubuntu 12.04 user who may be using it in the wild. If we look at the PR, 
the way we're dropping the support is by simply bumping up few package 
dependency versions. The issue of supporting or dropping support for Ubuntu 
12.04 lies in those version changes only.


The more important thing right now is to support at least Ubuntu 16.04 hosts as 
KVM guests and usage-server hosts, which is much needed in both 4.9 and master 
branch for the upcoming 4.9.1.0 and 4.10.0.0 releases.


Wido -- would it be acceptable to avoid bumping up the min. package dependency 
version, i.e we don't change the pkg dependencies for cloudstack-agent and keep 
the version number as it is for lsb-base, qemu-kvm, libvirt-bin for 4.9 branch. 
While on 4.10, we can discuss if we want to drop the support now or plan this 
later.


Regards.


From: Wido den Hollander 
Sent: 23 August 2016 11:38:43
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; John Burwell; us...@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: Eliminating Support for Ubuntu 12.04


> Op 23 augustus 2016 om 1:02 schreef John Burwell :
>
>
> All,
>
> PR 1647 [1] proposes dropping support for Ubuntu 12.04 from 4.9.2.0+.  The 
> primary motivation for its removal is that the age of its libvirt and qemu 
> versions greatly complicate maintenance of the KVM integration.  However, 
> Ubuntu 12.04 will be supported until April 2017 [2]. What would be the impact 
> to our user community of removing support for Ubuntu 12.04 before its EOL in 
> April 2017?  If we don’t drop support for it in 4.x, would it be acceptable 
> to drop support for it in 5.0.0 which is currently scheduled for release at 
> the end of 2016 [3]?
>

The PR was supposed to go into 4.9 already, it just took way to long to get 
merged. So that's why it would now go into 4.9.2

> If we do chose to drop support for Ubuntu 12.04 in 4.x, I propose that we 
> remove it in 4.10.0.0 rather than 4.9.2.0.  First, it is reasonable for users 
> to expect that upgrading between patch releases (i.e. 4.9.x.x -> 4.9.x+1.x) 
> would not require system changes.  Dropping a distribution would violate such 
> an expectation.  Second, 4.9 is an LTS branch.  Therefore, maintaining 12.04 
> support in 4.9 would provide LTS users with support for Ubuntu 12.04 until 
> May 2018 — well after its EOL.  Does this approach seem reasonable if we 
> elect drop Ubuntu 12.04 in 4.x?

Again, this PR had to be merged earlier, not later. It's just very difficult 
packaging wise to keep supporting 12.04 and 16.04 at the same time.

The Qemu and libvirt versions in 12.04 are truly ancient. I doubt anybody is 
running stock 12.04 with CloudStack 4.8 right now for example.

The Ubuntu 12.04 debate has been popping up multiple times in the last year.

This PR has been open way to long, that's imho the main problem here.

I'm in favor of dropping 12.04, should have been done in 4.9 already and not 
wait any longer.

Wido

>
> Thanks,
> -John
>
> [1]: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1647
> [2]: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Releases
> [3]: 
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/%5BPROPOSAL%5D+2016-2017+Release+Cycle+and+Calendar
>
>
>
> john.burw...@shapeblue.com
> www.shapeblue.com
> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London VA WC2N 4HSUK
> @shapeblue
>
>
>

rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com 
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London  WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
  
 

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1599: Marvin: Fix codegenerator to work with API discovery

[rhtyd]

Github user rhtyd commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1599
  
Due to changes in marvin, specifically the code generator that runs during 
build-time and is not used with either Travis or otherwise, manual tests have 
confirmed the functionality working. With enough reviews, I'll merge this. 
Thanks all.


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1599: Marvin: Fix codegenerator to work with API di...

[asfgit]

Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1599


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1634: [blocker] CLOUDSTACK-9452: add python-argparse depen...

[rhtyd]

Github user rhtyd commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1634
  
@jburwell  thanks

- I've fixed the markdown issues -- see this for example -- 
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1638#issuecomment-241644475
- I'll fix the sorting issues, to sort status column
- I've added summary at the bottom of the table, noting the hypervisor, 
mgmt server os, zone type and link to the marvin logs for anyone to inspect 
further


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1634: [blocker] CLOUDSTACK-9452: add python-argparse depen...

[rhtyd]

Github user rhtyd commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1634
  
We've enough LGTMs and test result (with vmware), I'll fire another 
Trillian job with KVM. 


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

Re: Eliminating Support for Ubuntu 12.04

[Wido den Hollander]

> Op 23 augustus 2016 om 11:38 schreef Rohit Yadav :
> 
> 
> Historically, CloudStack's debian/deb packages/repositories have never been 
> supported by the initial authors. For example, initial ACS version and all 
> CCP releases never shipped deb packages, nor in our (old and recent) 
> documentation we promote installation/running CloudStack on Debian/Ubuntu. 
> Afaik, it was Wido who introduced it because he wanted to run CloudStack on 
> Ubuntu/Debian-based distro. Also, the packages are something that the project 
> never shipped or endorsed or supported, so it's up to the maintainers of 
> various repositories how they are building and hosting CloudStack packages. 
> Even if we remove the packaging support in our branch/repository, anyone can 
> build CloudStack for any distro, several people/projects have packaging 
> related buildsystem/code separated from the project codebase. Most tutorials 
> that I found are based around Ubuntu 14.04 or CentOS, given that 12.04 is 4+ 
> years old, we might not even have anyone using CloudStack on it.
> 

I highly doubt somebody still runs Ubuntu 12.04 with a recent version of 
CloudStack.

4+ years in Qemu/libvirt time is a very long time.

> 
> That said -- I think 4.9 should at least not drop the support yet, just to 
> let any Ubuntu 12.04 user who may be using it in the wild. If we look at the 
> PR, the way we're dropping the support is by simply bumping up few package 
> dependency versions. The issue of supporting or dropping support for Ubuntu 
> 12.04 lies in those version changes only.
> 
> 
> The more important thing right now is to support at least Ubuntu 16.04 hosts 
> as KVM guests and usage-server hosts, which is much needed in both 4.9 and 
> master branch for the upcoming 4.9.1.0 and 4.10.0.0 releases.
> 
> 
> Wido -- would it be acceptable to avoid bumping up the min. package 
> dependency version, i.e we don't change the pkg dependencies for 
> cloudstack-agent and keep the version number as it is for lsb-base, qemu-kvm, 
> libvirt-bin for 4.9 branch. While on 4.10, we can discuss if we want to drop 
> the support now or plan this later.
> 
> 

Well, yes. But I don't know *what* might break on 12.04. I wrote the PR in May 
and there must have been a reason for that.

Feel free to modify the PR and not bump those versions. Packages might work or 
not, not completely sure.

Wido

> Regards.
> 
> 
> From: Wido den Hollander 
> Sent: 23 August 2016 11:38:43
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; John Burwell; us...@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Eliminating Support for Ubuntu 12.04
> 
> 
> > Op 23 augustus 2016 om 1:02 schreef John Burwell 
> > :
> >
> >
> > All,
> >
> > PR 1647 [1] proposes dropping support for Ubuntu 12.04 from 4.9.2.0+.  The 
> > primary motivation for its removal is that the age of its libvirt and qemu 
> > versions greatly complicate maintenance of the KVM integration.  However, 
> > Ubuntu 12.04 will be supported until April 2017 [2]. What would be the 
> > impact to our user community of removing support for Ubuntu 12.04 before 
> > its EOL in April 2017?  If we don’t drop support for it in 4.x, would it be 
> > acceptable to drop support for it in 5.0.0 which is currently scheduled for 
> > release at the end of 2016 [3]?
> >
> 
> The PR was supposed to go into 4.9 already, it just took way to long to get 
> merged. So that's why it would now go into 4.9.2
> 
> > If we do chose to drop support for Ubuntu 12.04 in 4.x, I propose that we 
> > remove it in 4.10.0.0 rather than 4.9.2.0.  First, it is reasonable for 
> > users to expect that upgrading between patch releases (i.e. 4.9.x.x -> 
> > 4.9.x+1.x) would not require system changes.  Dropping a distribution would 
> > violate such an expectation.  Second, 4.9 is an LTS branch.  Therefore, 
> > maintaining 12.04 support in 4.9 would provide LTS users with support for 
> > Ubuntu 12.04 until May 2018 — well after its EOL.  Does this approach seem 
> > reasonable if we elect drop Ubuntu 12.04 in 4.x?
> 
> Again, this PR had to be merged earlier, not later. It's just very difficult 
> packaging wise to keep supporting 12.04 and 16.04 at the same time.
> 
> The Qemu and libvirt versions in 12.04 are truly ancient. I doubt anybody is 
> running stock 12.04 with CloudStack 4.8 right now for example.
> 
> The Ubuntu 12.04 debate has been popping up multiple times in the last year.
> 
> This PR has been open way to long, that's imho the main problem here.
> 
> I'm in favor of dropping 12.04, should have been done in 4.9 already and not 
> wait any longer.
> 
> Wido
> 
> >
> > Thanks,
> > -John
> >
> > [1]: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1647
> > [2]: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Releases
> > [3]: 
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/%5BPROPOSAL%5D+2016-2017+Release+Cycle+and+Calendar
> >
> >
> >
> > john.burw...@sh

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1593: CLOUDSTACK-9417: Usage module refactoring

[rhtyd]

Github user rhtyd commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1593
  
@serg38 sorry the `test` keyword is restricted to RMs and few other people 
for now. There are failure that causes initial setup to fail. Can you confirm 
if this (mgmt server and usage server) work in your env with the above packages?


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1656: CLOUDSTACK-9466: Fix fk constraint failure in...

[rhtyd]

GitHub user rhtyd reopened a pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1656

CLOUDSTACK-9466: Fix fk constraint failure in upgrade path

In the 4.1.0-4.2.0 db upgrade path, it creates new tables to store secondary
(nfs) storage in image_store table and volumes in volume_store_ref table. In
the upgrade path, it first tries to migrate NFS storage pool where it 
excludes
storage pools which have been removed, but it migrates all the volumes 
without
checking if their storage pools have been removed. This causes fk constraint
failure as the volume/row being inserted refers to a storage pool which does
not exist in the image_store table.

The fix migrates all the nfs storage pools to image_store including removed
storage pools and in doing so migrates with the 'removed' field. This fixes
db upgrade for old pre-4.0 and 4.0/4.1 CloudStack clouds.

/cc @jburwell @PaulAngus @karuturi @abhinandanprateek @murali-reddy 

You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:

$ git pull https://github.com/shapeblue/cloudstack 4.9-fk410to420fix

Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch at:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1656.patch

To close this pull request, make a commit to your master/trunk branch
with (at least) the following in the commit message:

This closes #1656


commit 1b678cbcaaff29024ffa93c10a36954eaa874f6a
Author: Rohit Yadav 
Date:   2016-08-23T07:53:18Z

CLOUDSTACK-9466: Fix fk constraint failure in upgrade path

In the 4.1.0-4.2.0 db upgrade path, it creates new tables to store secondary
(nfs) storage in image_store table and volumes in volume_store_ref table. In
the upgrade path, it first tries to migrate NFS storage pool where it 
excludes
storage pools which have been removed, but it migrates all the volumes 
without
checking if their storage pools have been removed. This causes fk constraint
failure as the volume/row being inserted refers to a storage pool which does
not exist in the image_store table.

The fix migrates all the nfs storage pools to image_store including removed
storage pools and in doing so migrates with the 'removed' field. This fixes
db upgrade for old pre-4.0 and 4.0/4.1 CloudStack clouds.

Signed-off-by: Rohit Yadav 




---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1656: CLOUDSTACK-9466: Fix fk constraint failure in...

[rhtyd]

Github user rhtyd closed the pull request at:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1656


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1645: On snapshot backup, this converts the rbd raw format...

[wido]

Github user wido commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1645
  
It seems good, but I'm worried if the management server is also aware if 
this. The Answer going back to the mgmt server needs to tell it that the format 
became QCOW2.

I don't have a test env for this right now, but I think this PR will work 
just fine.


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1657: CLOUDSTACK-9467: Add symlink to key file for ...

[rhtyd]

GitHub user rhtyd opened a pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1657

CLOUDSTACK-9467: Add symlink to key file for usage server

On fresh installation, the usage server fails to start if the `key` file 
does
not exist in its classpath. The issue is reproducible in environments (such 
as Trillian)
where the usage server is installed before cloudstack-setup-databases has 
been called.
Before the cloudstack db has been setup, the key file does not exist at its
default location and installation of usage-server fails to add a symlink to 
the
key file.

This fix adds a default symlink to `/etc/cloudstack/management/key` if a
symlink/file does not already exist in the /etc/cloudstack/usage directory.

On new installation, in the post-installation steps it checks if the symlink
or file exists, and adds a symlink if it does not exist. On existing
installations, if symlink or file exists then it will skip adding symlink.

/cc @jburwell @PaulAngus @karuturi 
@blueorangutan package

You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:

$ git pull https://github.com/shapeblue/cloudstack 4.8-usageserverfix

Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch at:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1657.patch

To close this pull request, make a commit to your master/trunk branch
with (at least) the following in the commit message:

This closes #1657


commit 8cd44b1684b41884f10f350318dc8130eb5b5f75
Author: Rohit Yadav 
Date:   2016-08-23T11:50:41Z

CLOUDSTACK-9467: Add symlink to key file for usage server

On fresh installation, the usage server fails to start if the `key` file 
does
not exist in its classpath. The issue is reproducible in environments where
the usage server is installed before cloudstack-setup-databases has been 
called.
Before the cloudstack db has been setup, the key file does not exist at its
default location and installation of usage-server fails to add a symlink to 
the
key file.

This fix adds a default symlink to `/etc/cloudstack/management/key` if a
symlink/file does not already exist in the /etc/cloudstack/usage directory.

On new installation, in the post-installation steps it checks if the symlink
or file exists, and adds a symlink if it does not exist. On existing
installations, if symlink or file exists then it will skip adding symlink.

Signed-off-by: Rohit Yadav 




---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1657: CLOUDSTACK-9467: Add symlink to key file for usage s...

[blueorangutan]

Github user blueorangutan commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1657
  
@rhtyd a Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. I'll keep you 
posted as I make progress.


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1624: Fixes regarding VOLUME_DELETE events resultin...

[ProjectMoon]

Github user ProjectMoon commented on a diff in the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1624#discussion_r75853547
  
--- Diff: server/test/com/cloud/user/AccountManagerImplTest.java ---
@@ -231,6 +253,73 @@ public void cleanup() {
 CallContext.unregister();
 }
 
+public UsageEventUtils setupUsageUtils() {
+_usageEventDao = new MockUsageEventDao();
+UsageEventUtils utils = new UsageEventUtils();
+
+Map usageUtilsFields = new HashMap();
+usageUtilsFields.put("usageEventDao", "_usageEventDao");
+usageUtilsFields.put("accountDao", "_accountDao");
+usageUtilsFields.put("dcDao", "_dcDao");
+usageUtilsFields.put("configDao", "_configDao");
--- End diff --

In this case, the map is not used outside of the method.


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1657: [lts/blocker] CLOUDSTACK-9467: Add symlink to key fi...

[blueorangutan]

Github user blueorangutan commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1657
  
Packaging result: ✔centos6 ✔centos7 ✔debian repo: 
http://packages.shapeblue.com/cloudstack/pr/1657
Job ID-102


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1624: Fixes regarding VOLUME_DELETE events resulting from ...

[ProjectMoon]

Github user ProjectMoon commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1624
  
Has been rebased against latest 4.8 and the `TODO` comments removed. The 
map was left alone though.


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1657: [lts/blocker] CLOUDSTACK-9467: Add symlink to key fi...

[rhtyd]

Github user rhtyd commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1657
  
@blueorangutan test


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1657: [lts/blocker] CLOUDSTACK-9467: Add symlink to key fi...

[blueorangutan]

Github user blueorangutan commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1657
  
@rhtyd a Trillian-Jenkins test job (centos6 mgmt + vmware-55u3) has been 
kicked to run smoke tests against packages at 
http://packages.shapeblue.com/cloudstack/pr/1657


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack-docs-admin issue #40: index.po and ui.po translated in FR

[pdion891]

Github user pdion891 commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-docs-admin/pull/40
  
I'll review this PR, give me few days...


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1656: CLOUDSTACK-9466: Fix fk constraint failure in upgrad...

[serg38]

Github user serg38 commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1656
  
LGTM 


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1657: [lts/blocker] CLOUDSTACK-9467: Add symlink to key fi...

[serg38]

Github user serg38 commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1657
  
LGTM 


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1593: CLOUDSTACK-9417: Usage module refactoring

[serg38]

Github user serg38 commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1593
  
@rhtyd Confirming. No issues on usage and management servers.


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

Re: [GitHub] cloudstack issue #1652: Marvin Tests: Fix VPC network offering selection .

[Sergey Levitskiy]

@koushik-das  Actually there are 3 default VPC offerings.
Default VPC offering
Redundant VPC offering
Nuage VSP VPC Offering


The last 2 were introduced in May. VPC offering becomes default if 4th 
parameter is true in createVpcOffering e.g.

 createVpcOffering(nuageVPCOfferingName, nuageVPCOfferingDisplayText, 
NUAGE_VSP_VPC_SERVICE_MAP, true, VpcOffering.State.Enabled, null);

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1653: Prevent DNS reflection attacks

[NuxRo]

Github user NuxRo commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1653
  
So, you guys kind of lost me, all I want is my VRs not to be used in DNS 
reflection attacks.
Do we have a go or does it break things? :)


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1591: Updating Alert codes

[dcarbone]

Github user dcarbone commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1591
  
@jburwell: JIRA ticket created: 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9468


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1593: CLOUDSTACK-9417: Usage module refactoring

[nvazquez]

Github user nvazquez commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1593
  
@jburwell Sure, they are squashed now


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1606: Allow CGN (RFC6598) to be used within a VPC

[kiwiflyer]

Github user kiwiflyer commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1606
  
John, I'll defer to Aaron on this, as he submitted the PR.


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1658: Added an additional JSON diff output to the A...

[swill]

GitHub user swill opened a pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1658

Added an additional JSON diff output to the ApiXmlDocReader

The original TXT diff format is very hard to work with if you are trying to 
programmatically use the output to generate documentation.  Previously, 
@pdion891 spent a lot of time trying to manually reformat this output in order 
for it to be represented in the Release Notes.

This pull request adds JSON as an output format as well as the existing TXT 
to simplify the ability for parsers and generators to use the output.

This new JSON format was used to generate the 4.9.0 release notes (that 
code will be contributed separately).

Old manually formatted output: 

http://docs.cloudstack.apache.org/projects/cloudstack-release-notes/en/4.7.0/api-changes.html

New auto-formatted output using this new JSON output: 

http://docs.cloudstack.apache.org/projects/cloudstack-release-notes/en/4.9.0/api-changes.html

I have included the output of the `diff.txt` as well as the `diff.json` to 
this PR so you can see the resulting output of both file formats (diff between 
4.8 and 4.9).


[diff.txt.zip](https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/files/432983/diff.txt.zip)

[diff.json.zip](https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/files/432982/diff.json.zip)



You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:

$ git pull https://github.com/swill/cloudstack api_diff_gen

Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch at:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1658.patch

To close this pull request, make a commit to your master/trunk branch
with (at least) the following in the commit message:

This closes #1658


commit 9d61ebc88295e63acacae5fedf2e3da398a1dc4f
Author: Will Stevens 
Date:   2016-06-17T20:07:58Z

Added JSON diff output to the ApiXmlDocReader in additon TXT for parsability




---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1645: On snapshot backup, this converts the rbd raw format...

[kiwiflyer]

Github user kiwiflyer commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1645
  
For reference, here are the DB entries:


![snapshot_ref](https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/17278194/17900963/086b4146-6927-11e6-9885-5f91b53f85c2.png)


![snapshot_store_ref](https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/17278194/17900966/0bb0b674-6927-11e6-9724-99f361c1f00a.png)




---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1634: [blocker] CLOUDSTACK-9452: add python-argparse depen...

[blueorangutan]

Github user blueorangutan commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1634
  
Trillian test result (trillian-pr1634-49-kvm-centos68-cs49): 
Test completed. 45 look ok, 7 have errors


Test | Result | Time (s)
--- | --- | ---
test_04_rvpc_privategw_static_routes | `Failure` | 173.220
test_03_vpc_privategw_restart_vpc_cleanup | `Failure` | 87.754
test_02_vpc_privategw_static_routes | `Failure` | 82.476
test_01_vpc_privategw_acl | `Failure` | 47.131
test_extendPhysicalNetworkVlan | `Error` | 0.039
test_dedicatePublicIpRange | `Error` | 0.322
test_01_vpc_remote_access_vpn | `Error` | 0.092
test_01_snapshot_root_disk | `Error` | 0.059
ContextSuite context=TestListIdsParams>:setup | `Error` | 0.000
ContextSuite context=TestDedicateGuestVlanRange>:setup | `Error` | 0.000
test_router_dhcphosts | Success | 291.471
test_rolepermission_lifecycle_update | Success | 7.183
test_rolepermission_lifecycle_list | Success | 6.939
test_rolepermission_lifecycle_delete | Success | 6.798
test_rolepermission_lifecycle_create | Success | 6.862
test_rolepermission_lifecycle_concurrent_updates | Success | 6.969
test_role_lifecycle_update_role_inuse | Success | 7.025
test_role_lifecycle_update | Success | 11.926
test_role_lifecycle_list | Success | 6.845
test_role_lifecycle_delete | Success | 11.877
test_role_lifecycle_create | Success | 6.825
test_role_inuse_deletion | Success | 6.814
test_role_account_acls_multiple_mgmt_servers | Success | 8.997
test_role_account_acls | Success | 9.337
test_releaseIP | Success | 249.057
test_reboot_router | Success | 420.117
test_public_ip_user_account | Success | 10.306
test_public_ip_admin_account | Success | 40.320
test_oobm_zchange_password | Success | 20.649
test_oobm_multiple_mgmt_server_ownership | Success | 18.590
test_oobm_issue_power_status | Success | 10.563
test_oobm_issue_power_soft | Success | 15.583
test_oobm_issue_power_reset | Success | 15.595
test_oobm_issue_power_on | Success | 15.583
test_oobm_issue_power_off | Success | 15.592
test_oobm_issue_power_cycle | Success | 15.599
test_oobm_enabledisable_across_clusterzones | Success | 58.881
test_oobm_enable_feature_valid | Success | 5.220
test_oobm_enable_feature_invalid | Success | 0.135
test_oobm_disable_feature_valid | Success | 5.256
test_oobm_disable_feature_invalid | Success | 0.155
test_oobm_configure_invalid_driver | Success | 0.105
test_oobm_configure_default_driver | Success | 0.118
test_oobm_background_powerstate_sync | Success | 17.821
test_nic_secondaryip_add_remove | Success | 194.173
test_network_rules_acquired_public_ip_3_Load_Balancer_Rule | Success | 
67.156
test_network_rules_acquired_public_ip_2_nat_rule | Success | 61.934
test_network_rules_acquired_public_ip_1_static_nat_rule | Success | 154.560
test_network_acl | Success | 66.274
test_isolate_network_password_server | Success | 93.446
test_deployvm_userdispersing | Success | 20.671
test_deployvm_userdata_post | Success | 10.473
test_deployvm_userdata | Success | 121.267
test_deployvm_userconcentrated | Success | 86.630
test_deployvm_firstfit | Success | 55.723
test_deploy_vm_multiple | Success | 258.971
test_deploy_vm_from_iso | Success | 428.730
test_deploy_vm | Success | 0.027
test_delete_account | Success | 259.013
test_default_role_deletion | Success | 6.919
test_create_pvlan_network | Success | 5.232
test_createRegion | Success | 0.052
test_createPortablePublicIPRange | Success | 15.427
test_createPortablePublicIPAcquire | Success | 15.699
test_assign_and_removal_lb | Success | 134.011
test_advZoneVirtualRouter | Success | 0.022
test_UpdateStorageOverProvisioningFactor | Success | 0.154
test_UpdateConfigParamWithScope | Success | 0.157
test_DeployVmAntiAffinityGroup_in_project | Success | 197.434
test_DeployVmAntiAffinityGroup | Success | 71.075
test_CreateTemplateWithDuplicateName | Success | 121.145
test_10_destroy_cpvm | Success | 191.835
test_10_attachAndDetach_iso | Success | 71.829
test_09_reboot_router | Success | 45.381
test_09_expunge_vm | Success | 125.174
test_09_destroy_ssvm | Success | 163.950
test_09_delete_detached_volume | Success | 15.699
test_08_start_router | Success | 30.316
test_08_resize_volume | Success | 15.476
test_08_reboot_cpvm | Success | 131.901
test_08_migrate_vm | Success | 41.761
test_08_list_system_templates | Success | 0.031
test_07_stop_router | Success | 10.164
test_07_restore_vm | Success | 0.132
test_07_resize_fail | Success | 20.547
test_07_reboot_ssvm | Success | 133.872
test_07_list_public_templates | Success | 0.035
test_07_list_default_iso | Success | 0.063
test_06_stop_cpvm | Success | 131.868
test_06_router_a

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1654: Updating pom.xml version numbers for release 4.8.2.0...

[rhtyd]

Github user rhtyd commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1654
  
I think a db upgrade path is missing causing Travis failures.


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1605: CLOUDSTACK-9428: Fix for CLOUDSTACK-9211 - Improve p...

[rafaelweingartner]

Github user rafaelweingartner commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1605
  
@nvazquez, 
Very nice proposal this one. I have only very small suggestions, which are 
the following:
* The method “videoCardConfig”, would be better if called 
“configureVideoCard”, normally I treat methods as actions, and as such, 
they normally start with a verb. This is cosmetics, but I think it helps to 
follow the code.
* Method “modifyVmVideoCardVRamSize” does not need that throws 
Exception.
* Would you mind creating a test case for “modifyVmVideoCardVRamSize”, 
it is a very simple integration test case.  It is pretty easy to do with mocks, 
if you need any help, just send me an email.
* If you remove the “throws exception from modifyVmVideoCardVRamSize”, 
you can also remove from “setNewVRamSizeVmVideoCard”.
* Would you mind creating test cases for the method 
“setNewVRamSizeVmVideoCard”?
* Method “videoCardConfig”, if you removed the “throw Exception” 
from the above methods, you can remove the “Catch Exception from here”
* And also, what about  test cases for the method “videoCardConfig”?
* What about changing the verb of “configSpecVideoCardNewVRamSize” 
method to its complete form “configure”?
* And finally, what about a test case for 
“configSpecVideoCardNewVRamSize”?

@nvazquez great work, my suggestions are mostly aesthetics, but I think 
they can help improve this PR.


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1560: CLOUDSTACK-9386: DS template copies don’t get dele...

[rafaelweingartner]

Github user rafaelweingartner commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1560
  
LGTM from me here ;)
thanks @serg38 and @nvazquez for the hard work.


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1645: On snapshot backup, this converts the rbd raw format...

[wido]

Github user wido commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1645
  
What I see to remember somehow is that the management server/code always 
thinks a snapshot is in the same format as the base image was.

So when you try to do something with this snapshot it still thinks it is 
RAW since that's what the original volume is.

For a snapshot there is no additional field saying that's QCOW2 and not RAW.


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1645: On snapshot backup, this converts the rbd raw format...

[kiwiflyer]

Github user kiwiflyer commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1645
  
Yeah, there seems to be some black magic going on here. We'll dig into this 
a bit more.


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1645: On snapshot backup, this converts the rbd raw format...

[jburwell]

Github user jburwell commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1645
  
@kiwiflyer @nathanejohnson as part of your continued evaluation, can you 
evaluate the following test cases to ensure this new behavior is verified and 
regression tested:

* ``smoke/test_snaptshots.py``
* ``component/test_snapshot_gc.py``
* ``component/test_snapshot_limits.py``
* ``component/test_snapshots.py``
* ``component/test_snapshots_improvements.py``



---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1605: CLOUDSTACK-9428: Fix for CLOUDSTACK-9211 - Improve p...

[jburwell]

Github user jburwell commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1605
  
@serg38 looking through PR #1310, I don't see any Marvin test cases to 
exercising this behavior.  

@nvazquez please add Marvin tests to exercise specifying vGPU parameters 
when creating a VM and updating its configuration.


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1593: CLOUDSTACK-9417: Usage module refactoring

[jburwell]

Github user jburwell commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1593
  
@abhinandanprateek do you have time to test this PR when upgrading a a 
clustered usage server environment from 4.9 to master?


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1591: Updating Alert codes

[jburwell]

Github user jburwell commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1591
  
@dcarbone thanks for creating a JIRA ticket.  Could you please prepend the 
headline of your commit message with the ticket ID (i.e. [CLOUDSTACK-9468])?  
Additionally, the Travis build is failing.  Could you please investigate the 
cause and fix it?

/cc @rhtyd


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1657: [lts/blocker] CLOUDSTACK-9467: Add symlink to key fi...

[jburwell]

Github user jburwell commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1657
  
@rhtyd do you see any potential conflict between this PR and PR #1593?  
Also, the Travis build failed.  Could you please investigate?


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1645: On snapshot backup, this converts the rbd raw format...

[jburwell]

Github user jburwell commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1645
  
@nathanejohnson could you please create JIRA ticket for this issue and 
prepend the commit message with the ID?


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1656: CLOUDSTACK-9466: Fix fk constraint failure in upgrad...

[jburwell]

Github user jburwell commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1656
  
@rhtyd would it be possible to re-target this PR to the 4.8 branch?  It 
seems like a good fix to include in 4.8.2.0 as well as 4.9.1.0.


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1605: CLOUDSTACK-9428: Fix for CLOUDSTACK-9211 - Improve p...

[nvazquez]

Github user nvazquez commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1605
  
@rafaelweingartner Thanks for your review! I'll work on your suggestions!
@jburwell Sure, I'll work on it


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

JuniperSRX firewall configure plugin source bug

[Gust]

Hi , all

There is a bug in com.cloud.network.resource.JuniperSrxResource

It will report syntax error when configure  outgress rule to Juniper srx 
hardware firewall.


begin line 2830 :

if 
(type.equals(SecurityPolicyType.SECURITYPOLICY_EGRESS_DEFAULT)) {
if (defaultEgressAction == false) {
//for default policy is false add default deny rules
action = "";
} else {
action = "";
}

} else {
if (defaultEgressAction == true) {
//configure egress rules to deny the traffic when 
default egress is allow
action = "";
} else {
action = "";
}
//error here
xml = replaceXmlValue(xml, "action", action);

}

fix:

if 
(type.equals(SecurityPolicyType.SECURITYPOLICY_EGRESS_DEFAULT)) {
if (defaultEgressAction == false) {
//for default policy is false add default deny rules
action = "";
} else {
action = "";
}

} else {
if (defaultEgressAction == true) {
//configure egress rules to deny the traffic when 
default egress is allow
action = "";
} else {
action = "";
}
}
//move replace  out
xml = replaceXmlValue(xml, "action", action);



gust 

Being china.
2016-08-24

Re: Eliminating Support for Ubuntu 12.04

[John Burwell]

Wido,

My only issue is dropping for any distro between patch releases.  If someone is 
running 4.9.0.0 on Ubuntu 12.04, and they need to update to 4.9.1.0+ (e.g. to 
get a CVE fix), they will be stranded.  This failure seems to fail the Law of 
Least Surprise.  While I recognize that it is unlikely that we have people 
running 4.9 on 12.04, it is impossible to be certain.  Therefore, I vote to 
play it safe, and continue to support it in 4.9 release branch.

For master (i.e. 4.10.0.0), Wido makes a strong case for dropping Ubuntu 12.04. 
 If any users are using Ubuntu 12.04 when 4.10.0 is released, they would have a 
supported release well past the April 2017 EOL since 4.9 is an LTS release.  
Therefore, removing Ubuntu 12.04 support from 4.10.0.0 seems like a Good Thing 
(tm) in terms of simplifying the code and testing matrix.

Can everyone accept that the 4.9 release branch will be the last to support 
Ubuntu 12.04?  If so, we can repoint the PR and merge it.

In terms of Ubuntu 16.04 support, ideally we would support it in 4.9.1.0+.  
However, if I understand Wido correctly, supporting Ubuntu 12.04 and 16.04 in 
the same branch is very difficult or impossible.  Am I correct in my 
understanding?

Thanks,
-John

> 
john.burw...@shapeblue.com 
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London VA WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
  
 

On Aug 23, 2016, at 6:14 AM, Wido den Hollander  wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Op 23 augustus 2016 om 11:38 schreef Rohit Yadav :
>> 
>> 
>> Historically, CloudStack's debian/deb packages/repositories have never been 
>> supported by the initial authors. For example, initial ACS version and all 
>> CCP releases never shipped deb packages, nor in our (old and recent) 
>> documentation we promote installation/running CloudStack on Debian/Ubuntu. 
>> Afaik, it was Wido who introduced it because he wanted to run CloudStack on 
>> Ubuntu/Debian-based distro. Also, the packages are something that the 
>> project never shipped or endorsed or supported, so it's up to the 
>> maintainers of various repositories how they are building and hosting 
>> CloudStack packages. Even if we remove the packaging support in our 
>> branch/repository, anyone can build CloudStack for any distro, several 
>> people/projects have packaging related buildsystem/code separated from the 
>> project codebase. Most tutorials that I found are based around Ubuntu 14.04 
>> or CentOS, given that 12.04 is 4+ years old, we might not even have anyone 
>> using CloudStack on it.
>> 
> 
> I highly doubt somebody still runs Ubuntu 12.04 with a recent version of 
> CloudStack.
> 
> 4+ years in Qemu/libvirt time is a very long time.
> 
>> 
>> That said -- I think 4.9 should at least not drop the support yet, just to 
>> let any Ubuntu 12.04 user who may be using it in the wild. If we look at the 
>> PR, the way we're dropping the support is by simply bumping up few package 
>> dependency versions. The issue of supporting or dropping support for Ubuntu 
>> 12.04 lies in those version changes only.
>> 
>> 
>> The more important thing right now is to support at least Ubuntu 16.04 hosts 
>> as KVM guests and usage-server hosts, which is much needed in both 4.9 and 
>> master branch for the upcoming 4.9.1.0 and 4.10.0.0 releases.
>> 
>> 
>> Wido -- would it be acceptable to avoid bumping up the min. package 
>> dependency version, i.e we don't change the pkg dependencies for 
>> cloudstack-agent and keep the version number as it is for lsb-base, 
>> qemu-kvm, libvirt-bin for 4.9 branch. While on 4.10, we can discuss if we 
>> want to drop the support now or plan this later.
>> 
>> 
> 
> Well, yes. But I don't know *what* might break on 12.04. I wrote the PR in 
> May and there must have been a reason for that.
> 
> Feel free to modify the PR and not bump those versions. Packages might work 
> or not, not completely sure.
> 
> Wido
> 
>> Regards.
>> 
>> 
>> From: Wido den Hollander 
>> Sent: 23 August 2016 11:38:43
>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; John Burwell; us...@cloudstack.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Eliminating Support for Ubuntu 12.04
>> 
>> 
>>> Op 23 augustus 2016 om 1:02 schreef John Burwell 
>>> :
>>> 
>>> 
>>> All,
>>> 
>>> PR 1647 [1] proposes dropping support for Ubuntu 12.04 from 4.9.2.0+.  The 
>>> primary motivation for its removal is that the age of its libvirt and qemu 
>>> versions greatly complicate maintenance of the KVM integration.  However, 
>>> Ubuntu 12.04 will be supported until April 2017 [2]. What would be the 
>>> impact to our user community of removing support for Ubuntu 12.04 before 
>>> its EOL in April 2017?  If we don’t drop support for it in 4.x, would it be 
>>> acceptable to drop support for it in 5.0.0 which is currently scheduled for 
>>> release at the end of 2016 [3]?
>>> 
>> 
>> The PR was supposed to go into 4.9 already, it just took way to long to get 
>> merged. So that's why it would now go into 4.9.2
>> 
>>> If we do chose to drop support for Ubuntu 12.04 i

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1653: Prevent DNS reflection attacks

[jburwell]

Github user jburwell commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1653
  
@NuxRo this patch does not appear to break things.  However, we want to add 
a Marvin test case to verify that the fix does not regress again.  Does that 
make sense?

@rhtyd is planning to write the Marvin test case this week.  Once he is 
done and we retest, we will merge this PR.


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

Re: JuniperSRX firewall configure plugin source bug

[Jayapal Uradi]

Hi Gust,

The changes look good  please go head and raise a PR for it.

Thanks,
Jayapal
> On Aug 24, 2016, at 8:14 AM, Gust  wrote:
>
> Hi , all
>
> There is a bug in com.cloud.network.resource.JuniperSrxResource
>
> It will report syntax error when configure  outgress rule to Juniper srx 
> hardware firewall.
>
>
> begin line 2830 :
>
>if 
> (type.equals(SecurityPolicyType.SECURITYPOLICY_EGRESS_DEFAULT)) {
>if (defaultEgressAction == false) {
>//for default policy is false add default deny 
> rules
>action = "";
>} else {
>action = "";
>}
>
>} else {
>if (defaultEgressAction == true) {
>//configure egress rules to deny the traffic when 
> default egress is allow
>action = "";
>} else {
>action = "";
>}
> //error here
>xml = replaceXmlValue(xml, "action", action);
>
>}
>
> fix:
>
>if 
> (type.equals(SecurityPolicyType.SECURITYPOLICY_EGRESS_DEFAULT)) {
>if (defaultEgressAction == false) {
>//for default policy is false add default deny 
> rules
>action = "";
>} else {
>action = "";
>}
>
>} else {
>if (defaultEgressAction == true) {
>//configure egress rules to deny the traffic when 
> default egress is allow
>action = "";
>} else {
>action = "";
>}
>}
> //move replace  out
>xml = replaceXmlValue(xml, "action", action);
>
>
>
> gust
>
> Being china.
> 2016-08-24
>
>
>
>




DISCLAIMER
==
This e-mail may contain privileged and confidential information which is the 
property of Accelerite, a Persistent Systems business. It is intended only for 
the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not 
the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, retain, copy, print, 
distribute or use this message. If you have received this communication in 
error, please notify the sender and delete all copies of this message. 
Accelerite, a Persistent Systems business does not accept any liability for 
virus infected mails.

Re: Eliminating Support for Ubuntu 12.04

[Makrand]

Guys,

I am not sure on overall developer talk, but let me understand something
here.

Bit about setup:-
So, at my new work place, we already have 5 zones (each zone with its own
management server) with management node running on Ubuntu 12.04. ACS 4.4.2
and XENserver 6.2.  It was setup by someone who isn't working here anymore.
There are some internal issues (Technical and Non-technical) with whole
setup and hence we don't have any immediate plans of upgrading 12.04 to
forward one or even cloudstack for that matter.

So If I get it correctly and you guys drop support for 12.04, say in 4.10,
then I can only upgrade to 4.9.x any time in future. Is that it?

Or If I decide to to upgrade to 4.10, then I should get my Ubuntu to 14.04
or higher and then cloud stack?



--
Best,
Makrand


On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 10:08 AM, John Burwell 
wrote:

> Wido,
>
> My only issue is dropping for any distro between patch releases.  If
> someone is running 4.9.0.0 on Ubuntu 12.04, and they need to update to
> 4.9.1.0+ (e.g. to get a CVE fix), they will be stranded.  This failure
> seems to fail the Law of Least Surprise.  While I recognize that it is
> unlikely that we have people running 4.9 on 12.04, it is impossible to be
> certain.  Therefore, I vote to play it safe, and continue to support it in
> 4.9 release branch.
>
> For master (i.e. 4.10.0.0), Wido makes a strong case for dropping Ubuntu
> 12.04.  If any users are using Ubuntu 12.04 when 4.10.0 is released, they
> would have a supported release well past the April 2017 EOL since 4.9 is an
> LTS release.  Therefore, removing Ubuntu 12.04 support from 4.10.0.0 seems
> like a Good Thing (tm) in terms of simplifying the code and testing matrix.
>
> Can everyone accept that the 4.9 release branch will be the last to
> support Ubuntu 12.04?  If so, we can repoint the PR and merge it.
>
> In terms of Ubuntu 16.04 support, ideally we would support it in
> 4.9.1.0+.  However, if I understand Wido correctly, supporting Ubuntu 12.04
> and 16.04 in the same branch is very difficult or impossible.  Am I correct
> in my understanding?
>
> Thanks,
> -John
>
> >
> john.burw...@shapeblue.com
> www.shapeblue.com
> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London VA WC2N 4HSUK
> @shapeblue
>
>
>
> On Aug 23, 2016, at 6:14 AM, Wido den Hollander  wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Op 23 augustus 2016 om 11:38 schreef Rohit Yadav <
> rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com>:
> >>
> >>
> >> Historically, CloudStack's debian/deb packages/repositories have never
> been supported by the initial authors. For example, initial ACS version and
> all CCP releases never shipped deb packages, nor in our (old and recent)
> documentation we promote installation/running CloudStack on Debian/Ubuntu.
> Afaik, it was Wido who introduced it because he wanted to run CloudStack on
> Ubuntu/Debian-based distro. Also, the packages are something that the
> project never shipped or endorsed or supported, so it's up to the
> maintainers of various repositories how they are building and hosting
> CloudStack packages. Even if we remove the packaging support in our
> branch/repository, anyone can build CloudStack for any distro, several
> people/projects have packaging related buildsystem/code separated from the
> project codebase. Most tutorials that I found are based around Ubuntu 14.04
> or CentOS, given that 12.04 is 4+ years old, we might not even have anyone
> using CloudStack on it.
> >>
> >
> > I highly doubt somebody still runs Ubuntu 12.04 with a recent version of
> CloudStack.
> >
> > 4+ years in Qemu/libvirt time is a very long time.
> >
> >>
> >> That said -- I think 4.9 should at least not drop the support yet, just
> to let any Ubuntu 12.04 user who may be using it in the wild. If we look at
> the PR, the way we're dropping the support is by simply bumping up few
> package dependency versions. The issue of supporting or dropping support
> for Ubuntu 12.04 lies in those version changes only.
> >>
> >>
> >> The more important thing right now is to support at least Ubuntu 16.04
> hosts as KVM guests and usage-server hosts, which is much needed in both
> 4.9 and master branch for the upcoming 4.9.1.0 and 4.10.0.0 releases.
> >>
> >>
> >> Wido -- would it be acceptable to avoid bumping up the min. package
> dependency version, i.e we don't change the pkg dependencies for
> cloudstack-agent and keep the version number as it is for lsb-base,
> qemu-kvm, libvirt-bin for 4.9 branch. While on 4.10, we can discuss if we
> want to drop the support now or plan this later.
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Well, yes. But I don't know *what* might break on 12.04. I wrote the PR
> in May and there must have been a reason for that.
> >
> > Feel free to modify the PR and not bump those versions. Packages might
> work or not, not completely sure.
> >
> > Wido
> >
> >> Regards.
> >>
> >> 
> >> From: Wido den Hollander 
> >> Sent: 23 August 2016 11:38:43
> >> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; John Burwell;
> us...@cloudstack.apache.org
> >> Su

Re: Eliminating Support for Ubuntu 12.04

[Wido den Hollander]

> Op 24 augustus 2016 om 6:38 schreef John Burwell :
> 
> 
> Wido,
> 
> My only issue is dropping for any distro between patch releases.  If someone 
> is running 4.9.0.0 on Ubuntu 12.04, and they need to update to 4.9.1.0+ (e.g. 
> to get a CVE fix), they will be stranded.  This failure seems to fail the Law 
> of Least Surprise.  While I recognize that it is unlikely that we have people 
> running 4.9 on 12.04, it is impossible to be certain.  Therefore, I vote to 
> play it safe, and continue to support it in 4.9 release branch.
> 

I understand. That's why I said that Rohit should change the PR which is open 
now.

However, what frustrates me a bit is that I submitted the PR in May this year 
and we are having this discussion now, again. That PR should have been merged a 
long time ago.

> For master (i.e. 4.10.0.0), Wido makes a strong case for dropping Ubuntu 
> 12.04.  If any users are using Ubuntu 12.04 when 4.10.0 is released, they 
> would have a supported release well past the April 2017 EOL since 4.9 is an 
> LTS release.  Therefore, removing Ubuntu 12.04 support from 4.10.0.0 seems 
> like a Good Thing (tm) in terms of simplifying the code and testing matrix.
> 
> Can everyone accept that the 4.9 release branch will be the last to support 
> Ubuntu 12.04?  If so, we can repoint the PR and merge it.
> 
> In terms of Ubuntu 16.04 support, ideally we would support it in 4.9.1.0+.  
> However, if I understand Wido correctly, supporting Ubuntu 12.04 and 16.04 in 
> the same branch is very difficult or impossible.  Am I correct in my 
> understanding?
> 

Well, I am not 100% sure what will happen. Didn't test it either. It will 
probably still work, but I can't guarantee it.

Wido

> Thanks,
> -John
> 
> > 
> john.burw...@shapeblue.com 
> www.shapeblue.com
> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London VA WC2N 4HSUK
> @shapeblue
>   
>  
> 
> On Aug 23, 2016, at 6:14 AM, Wido den Hollander  wrote:
> > 
> >> 
> >> Op 23 augustus 2016 om 11:38 schreef Rohit Yadav 
> >> :
> >> 
> >> 
> >> Historically, CloudStack's debian/deb packages/repositories have never 
> >> been supported by the initial authors. For example, initial ACS version 
> >> and all CCP releases never shipped deb packages, nor in our (old and 
> >> recent) documentation we promote installation/running CloudStack on 
> >> Debian/Ubuntu. Afaik, it was Wido who introduced it because he wanted to 
> >> run CloudStack on Ubuntu/Debian-based distro. Also, the packages are 
> >> something that the project never shipped or endorsed or supported, so it's 
> >> up to the maintainers of various repositories how they are building and 
> >> hosting CloudStack packages. Even if we remove the packaging support in 
> >> our branch/repository, anyone can build CloudStack for any distro, several 
> >> people/projects have packaging related buildsystem/code separated from the 
> >> project codebase. Most tutorials that I found are based around Ubuntu 
> >> 14.04 or CentOS, given that 12.04 is 4+ years old, we might not even have 
> >> anyone using CloudStack on it.
> >> 
> > 
> > I highly doubt somebody still runs Ubuntu 12.04 with a recent version of 
> > CloudStack.
> > 
> > 4+ years in Qemu/libvirt time is a very long time.
> > 
> >> 
> >> That said -- I think 4.9 should at least not drop the support yet, just to 
> >> let any Ubuntu 12.04 user who may be using it in the wild. If we look at 
> >> the PR, the way we're dropping the support is by simply bumping up few 
> >> package dependency versions. The issue of supporting or dropping support 
> >> for Ubuntu 12.04 lies in those version changes only.
> >> 
> >> 
> >> The more important thing right now is to support at least Ubuntu 16.04 
> >> hosts as KVM guests and usage-server hosts, which is much needed in both 
> >> 4.9 and master branch for the upcoming 4.9.1.0 and 4.10.0.0 releases.
> >> 
> >> 
> >> Wido -- would it be acceptable to avoid bumping up the min. package 
> >> dependency version, i.e we don't change the pkg dependencies for 
> >> cloudstack-agent and keep the version number as it is for lsb-base, 
> >> qemu-kvm, libvirt-bin for 4.9 branch. While on 4.10, we can discuss if we 
> >> want to drop the support now or plan this later.
> >> 
> >> 
> > 
> > Well, yes. But I don't know *what* might break on 12.04. I wrote the PR in 
> > May and there must have been a reason for that.
> > 
> > Feel free to modify the PR and not bump those versions. Packages might work 
> > or not, not completely sure.
> > 
> > Wido
> > 
> >> Regards.
> >> 
> >> 
> >> From: Wido den Hollander 
> >> Sent: 23 August 2016 11:38:43
> >> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; John Burwell; us...@cloudstack.apache.org
> >> Subject: Re: Eliminating Support for Ubuntu 12.04
> >> 
> >> 
> >>> Op 23 augustus 2016 om 1:02 schreef John Burwell 
> >>> :
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>> All,
> >>> 
> >>> PR 1647 [1] proposes dropping support for Ubuntu 12.04 from 4.9.2.0+.  
> >>> The primary motivation for its remova

Re: Eliminating Support for Ubuntu 12.04

[Wido den Hollander]

> Op 24 augustus 2016 om 7:47 schreef Makrand :
> 
> 
> Guys,
> 
> I am not sure on overall developer talk, but let me understand something
> here.
> 
> Bit about setup:-
> So, at my new work place, we already have 5 zones (each zone with its own
> management server) with management node running on Ubuntu 12.04. ACS 4.4.2
> and XENserver 6.2.  It was setup by someone who isn't working here anymore.
> There are some internal issues (Technical and Non-technical) with whole
> setup and hence we don't have any immediate plans of upgrading 12.04 to
> forward one or even cloudstack for that matter.
> 
> So If I get it correctly and you guys drop support for 12.04, say in 4.10,
> then I can only upgrade to 4.9.x any time in future. Is that it?
> 
> Or If I decide to to upgrade to 4.10, then I should get my Ubuntu to 14.04
> or higher and then cloud stack?
> 

Yes, indeed. Those systems would need to go to 14.04 but preferably 16.04 by 
then.

Wido

> 
> 
> --
> Best,
> Makrand
> 
> 
> On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 10:08 AM, John Burwell 
> wrote:
> 
> > Wido,
> >
> > My only issue is dropping for any distro between patch releases.  If
> > someone is running 4.9.0.0 on Ubuntu 12.04, and they need to update to
> > 4.9.1.0+ (e.g. to get a CVE fix), they will be stranded.  This failure
> > seems to fail the Law of Least Surprise.  While I recognize that it is
> > unlikely that we have people running 4.9 on 12.04, it is impossible to be
> > certain.  Therefore, I vote to play it safe, and continue to support it in
> > 4.9 release branch.
> >
> > For master (i.e. 4.10.0.0), Wido makes a strong case for dropping Ubuntu
> > 12.04.  If any users are using Ubuntu 12.04 when 4.10.0 is released, they
> > would have a supported release well past the April 2017 EOL since 4.9 is an
> > LTS release.  Therefore, removing Ubuntu 12.04 support from 4.10.0.0 seems
> > like a Good Thing (tm) in terms of simplifying the code and testing matrix.
> >
> > Can everyone accept that the 4.9 release branch will be the last to
> > support Ubuntu 12.04?  If so, we can repoint the PR and merge it.
> >
> > In terms of Ubuntu 16.04 support, ideally we would support it in
> > 4.9.1.0+.  However, if I understand Wido correctly, supporting Ubuntu 12.04
> > and 16.04 in the same branch is very difficult or impossible.  Am I correct
> > in my understanding?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > -John
> >
> > >
> > john.burw...@shapeblue.com
> > www.shapeblue.com
> > 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London VA WC2N 4HSUK
> > @shapeblue
> >
> >
> >
> > On Aug 23, 2016, at 6:14 AM, Wido den Hollander  wrote:
> > >
> > >>
> > >> Op 23 augustus 2016 om 11:38 schreef Rohit Yadav <
> > rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com>:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Historically, CloudStack's debian/deb packages/repositories have never
> > been supported by the initial authors. For example, initial ACS version and
> > all CCP releases never shipped deb packages, nor in our (old and recent)
> > documentation we promote installation/running CloudStack on Debian/Ubuntu.
> > Afaik, it was Wido who introduced it because he wanted to run CloudStack on
> > Ubuntu/Debian-based distro. Also, the packages are something that the
> > project never shipped or endorsed or supported, so it's up to the
> > maintainers of various repositories how they are building and hosting
> > CloudStack packages. Even if we remove the packaging support in our
> > branch/repository, anyone can build CloudStack for any distro, several
> > people/projects have packaging related buildsystem/code separated from the
> > project codebase. Most tutorials that I found are based around Ubuntu 14.04
> > or CentOS, given that 12.04 is 4+ years old, we might not even have anyone
> > using CloudStack on it.
> > >>
> > >
> > > I highly doubt somebody still runs Ubuntu 12.04 with a recent version of
> > CloudStack.
> > >
> > > 4+ years in Qemu/libvirt time is a very long time.
> > >
> > >>
> > >> That said -- I think 4.9 should at least not drop the support yet, just
> > to let any Ubuntu 12.04 user who may be using it in the wild. If we look at
> > the PR, the way we're dropping the support is by simply bumping up few
> > package dependency versions. The issue of supporting or dropping support
> > for Ubuntu 12.04 lies in those version changes only.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> The more important thing right now is to support at least Ubuntu 16.04
> > hosts as KVM guests and usage-server hosts, which is much needed in both
> > 4.9 and master branch for the upcoming 4.9.1.0 and 4.10.0.0 releases.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Wido -- would it be acceptable to avoid bumping up the min. package
> > dependency version, i.e we don't change the pkg dependencies for
> > cloudstack-agent and keep the version number as it is for lsb-base,
> > qemu-kvm, libvirt-bin for 4.9 branch. While on 4.10, we can discuss if we
> > want to drop the support now or plan this later.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > > Well, yes. But I don't know *what* might break on 12.04. I wrote the PR
> > in May and there

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1656: CLOUDSTACK-9466: Fix fk constraint failure in upgrad...

[rhtyd]

Github user rhtyd commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1656
  
@jburwell fixed.


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1656: CLOUDSTACK-9466: Fix fk constraint failure in upgrad...

[rhtyd]

Github user rhtyd commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1656
  
There are no upgrade tests to confirm the fix as all the changes are in an 
older 4.1.0->4.2.0 upgrade path. After this fix, here are manual test results 
to show that db upgrade finished cleanly without breaking with foreign key 
constraint issue:

> 2016-08-23 13:55:06,886 DEBUG [c.c.u.d.Upgrade410to420] (main:null) 
(logid:) Migrating secondary storage to image store 
> 2016-08-23 13:55:06,896 DEBUG [c.c.u.d.Upgrade410to420] (main:null) 
(logid:) Checking if we need to migrate NFS secondary storage to image store or 
staging store 
> 2016-08-23 13:55:06,896 DEBUG [c.c.u.d.Upgrade410to420] (main:null) 
(logid:) Migrating NFS secondary storage to Image store 
> 2016-08-23 13:55:06,921 DEBUG [c.c.u.d.Upgrade410to420] (main:null) 
(logid:) Marking NFS secondary storage in host table as removed
> 2016-08-23 13:55:06,934 DEBUG [c.c.u.d.Upgrade410to420] (main:null) 
(logid:) Completed migrating secondary storage to image store 
> 2016-08-23 13:55:06,934 DEBUG [c.c.u.d.Upgrade410to420] (main:null) 
(logid:) Updating volume_store_ref table from volume_host_ref table 
> 2016-08-23 13:55:06,957 DEBUG [c.c.u.d.Upgrade410to420] (main:null) 
(logid:) Insert modified 22 rows
> 2016-08-23 13:55:06,958 DEBUG [c.c.u.d.Upgrade410to420] (main:null) 
(logid:) Update modified 0 rows
> 2016-08-23 13:55:06,958 DEBUG [c.c.u.d.Upgrade410to420] (main:null) 
(logid:) Completed updating volume_store_ref table from volume_host_ref table 
> 2016-08-23 13:55:06,958 DEBUG [c.c.u.d.Upgrade410to420] (main:null) 
(logid:) Updating template_store_ref table from template_host_ref table 
> 2016-08-23 13:55:07,445 DEBUG [c.c.u.d.Upgrade410to420] (main:null) 
(logid:) Insert modified 6622 rows
> 2016-08-23 13:55:07,479 DEBUG [c.c.u.d.Upgrade410to420] (main:null) 
(logid:) Update modified 3666 rows
> 2016-08-23 13:55:07,479 DEBUG [c.c.u.d.Upgrade410to420] (main:null) 
(logid:) Completed updating template_store_ref table from template_host_ref 
table 
> 2016-08-23 13:55:07,479 DEBUG [c.c.u.d.Upgrade410to420] (main:null) 
(logid:) Updating snapshot_store_ref table from snapshots table 


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1648: test/integration: fix tearDown order in list_acl_ te...

[rhtyd]

Github user rhtyd commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1648
  
@jburwell can you review/lgtm now? thanks.


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1657: [lts/blocker] CLOUDSTACK-9467: Add symlink to key fi...

[rhtyd]

Github user rhtyd commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1657
  
@jburwell no this is PR is related to packaging, while 1593 fixes something 
different. The Travis build failure has been fixed at #1648, the failures are 
unrelated to this PR. Since this is a packaging fix, built packages confirm 
that packaging is not broken. Further, Trillian tests confirm regression 
testing (though due to an infra issue the tests have not been commented here).

Manual installation confirmed the fix, usage server started without any 
issue.
># /etc/init.d/cloudstack-usage status
> * cloudstack-usage is running



---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1634: [blocker] CLOUDSTACK-9452: add python-argparse depen...

[rhtyd]

Github user rhtyd commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1634
  
Merging based on lgtms and test results (the failures are due to env 
issues, and failing tests not related to the pkging fix).


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1634: [blocker] CLOUDSTACK-9452: add python-argpars...

[asfgit]

Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1634


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1647: [lts] CLOUDSTACK-9462: Systemd support for Ubuntu 16...

[rhtyd]

Github user rhtyd commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1647
  
@wido based on the ML discussion, I've removed the specific change that 
removed 12.04 support. Can you send another PR for master for removing support 
for 12.04.


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---