Hi,
I have a 4 node openstack setup (1 controller, 1 network, 2 compute nodes).
I want to install kuryr in liberty version. I cannot find a package in
ubuntu repo.
-How do i install kuryr?
- what are the components that need to be installed on the respective
nodes?
- Do i need to install magnum for
FYI
Forwarded Message
Subject: [openstack-dev] Summit evolution online town halls
Date: Tue, 24 May 2016 10:21:51 -0700
From: Jonathan Bryce
Reply-To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
To: openstack-...@lists.openstack.org
Hi everyone,
You might
On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 6:36 PM, Sam Morrison wrote:
> I’m in favour of using 3.5. We are in the process of moving things to
> ubuntu xenial and 3.5 is native there.
>
Thanks for the feedback!
>
> BTW when is Craton planning on getting into openstack gerrit etc?
>
The specific timeline of the
I’m in favour of using 3.5. We are in the process of moving things to ubuntu
xenial and 3.5 is native there.
BTW when is Craton planning on getting into openstack gerrit etc?
Sam
> On 25 May 2016, at 6:20 AM, Jim Baker wrote:
>
> tl;dr - any reason why Craton should support Python 2.7 for
On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 3:28 AM, Dan Smith wrote:
> > It was my impression we were trying to prevent bitrot, not defend
> > against an attacker that has gained control over the compute node.
>
> I think we've established that addressing bitrot at the nova layer is
> (far) out of scope and not som
tl;dr - any reason why Craton should support Python 2.7 for your use case?
First, some background: Craton is a fleet management tool under active
development for standing up and maintaining OpenStack clouds. It does so by
supporting inventory and audit/remediation workflows, both at scale and
bein
> It was my impression we were trying to prevent bitrot, not defend
> against an attacker that has gained control over the compute node.
I think we've established that addressing bitrot at the nova layer is
(far) out of scope and not something we want or need to do in nova.
--Dan
___
On 05/24/2016 09:54 AM, Dan Smith wrote:
I like the idea of checking the md5 matches before each boot, as it
mirrors the check we do after downloading from glance. Its possible
thats very unlikely to spot anything that shouldn't already be worried
about by something else. It may just be my love o
> I like the idea of checking the md5 matches before each boot, as it
> mirrors the check we do after downloading from glance. Its possible
> thats very unlikely to spot anything that shouldn't already be worried
> about by something else. It may just be my love of symmetry that makes
> me like tha
On 05/23/2016 08:46 PM, John Griffith wrote:
On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 8:32 AM, Ivan Kolodyazhny mailto:e...@e0ne.info>> wrote:
Hi developers and operators,
I would like to get any feedback from you about my idea before I'll start
work on spec.
In Nova, we've got max_concurrent_
Hi All -
We have a Scientific WG IRC meeting tomorrow at 0700 UTC on channel
#openstack-meeting
The agenda is available here[1].
Best wishes,
Stig
[1]
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Scientific_working_group#IRC_Meeting_May_25th_2016
___
OpenStack-o
On 05/23/2016 11:56 AM, Tim Bell wrote:
> On 23/05/16 17:02, "Sean Dague" wrote:
>
>> On 05/23/2016 10:24 AM, Tim Bell wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Quick warning for those who are dependent on the "user_id:%(user_id)s"
>>> syntax for limiting actions by user. According to
>>> https://bugs.launchpad.net/
On 05/24/2016 02:22 AM, Jerome Pansanel wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Le 23/05/2016 18:23, Sean Dague a écrit :
>> On 05/23/2016 11:56 AM, Tim Bell wrote:
>>> On 23/05/16 17:02, "Sean Dague" wrote:
>>>
On 05/23/2016 10:24 AM, Tim Bell wrote:
>
>
> [...]
> There can be security implications
On Tue, 24 May 2016, Matthew Booth wrote:
I understand that corruption of bits on disks is a thing, but it's a thing
for more than just the image cache. I feel that this is a problem much
better solved at other layers, prime candidates being the block and
filesystem layers. There are existing ro
On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 11:06 AM, John Garbutt wrote:
> On 24 May 2016 at 10:16, Matthew Booth wrote:
> > During its periodic task, ImageCacheManager does a checksum of every
> image
> > in the cache. It verifies this checksum against a previously stored
> value,
> > or creates that value if it
On 24 May 2016 at 10:16, Matthew Booth wrote:
> During its periodic task, ImageCacheManager does a checksum of every image
> in the cache. It verifies this checksum against a previously stored value,
> or creates that value if it doesn't already exist.[1] Based on this
> information it generates a
During its periodic task, ImageCacheManager does a checksum of every image
in the cache. It verifies this checksum against a previously stored value,
or creates that value if it doesn't already exist.[1] Based on this
information it generates a log message if the image is corrupt, but
otherwise tak
17 matches
Mail list logo
