The jenkins build of the systemvm has been failing for a couple of days. Can someone clean it up?
On 6/7/13 5:35 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal" <chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com> wrote: >This is now done. >http://s.apache.org/wy > > > >On 5/28/13 3:35 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal" <chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com> >wrote: > >>Thanks. I'll wait for the i386 bits to land as well. >> >>On 5/28/13 3:07 PM, "Milamber" <milam...@apache.org> wrote: >> >>>Hello Chiradeep, >>> >>>Please note, haproxy has been backported in Debian Wheezy (7.0): >>>http://lists.debian.org/debian-backports-changes/2013/05/msg00050.html >>>http://packages.debian.org/wheezy-backports/haproxy >>> >>>Milamber >>> >>>Le 11/05/2013 01:14, Chiradeep Vittal a ecrit : >>>> Fixed by fetching haproxy 1.4.8-1 from squeeze-backports >>>> >>>> On 5/9/13 4:16 PM, "Sheng Yang" <sh...@yasker.org> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Don't know. We can use Ubuntu package for now if it possible. >>>>> >>>>> or just use sid packages if possible? >>>>> >>>>> dnsmasq version is 0.62, which is good enough for ipv6. >>>>> >>>>> --Sheng >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 4:04 PM, Chiradeep Vittal < >>>>> chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> How old? When did it disappear? >>>>>> >>>>>> I propose using the Ubuntu package. >>>>>> In tools/appliance/definitions/systemvmtemplate/postinstall.sh >>>>>> >>>>>> wget >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/pool/main/h/haproxy/haproxy_1.4.18- >>>>>>0 >>>>>>u >>>>>>bu >>>>>> nt >>>>>> u2.1_i386.deb >>>>>> >>>>>> dpkg -i haproxy_1.4.18-0ubuntu2.1_i386.deb >>>>>> >>>>>> Also do we know if the system vm template contains the version of >>>>>> dnsmasq >>>>>> that is known to work for ipv6 support? >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Chiradeep >>>>>> >>>>>> On 5/9/13 3:48 PM, "Sheng Yang" <sh...@yasker.org> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> No idea. Probably we should just grab some old generated systemvm >>>>>>>for >>>>>> now. >>>>>>> --Sheng >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 3:37 PM, Chiradeep Vittal < >>>>>>> chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Should we use the Ubuntu package for now? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 5/9/13 2:03 PM, "Sheng Yang" <sh...@yasker.org> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> HAproxy is missing in Debian 7.0's repo, due to old maintainer is >>>>>>>> missing. >>>>>>>>> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=674447 >>>>>>>>> http://lists.debian.org/debian-qa/2013/04/msg00039.html >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The new maintainer took over it at Apr 20th, but there is no >>>>>> schedule >>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>> recovering yet. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> That's why depends on everyday generated systemvm template is >>>>>>>> dangerous. >>>>>>>>> --Sheng >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 12:09 AM, Rohit Yadav >>>>>>>>><bhais...@apache.org> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 11:45 AM, Abhinandan Prateek < >>>>>>>>>> agneya2...@hotmail.com >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> The haproxy and port map services are not installed on VMWare >>>>>>>> system >>>>>>>>>> VM >>>>>>>>>>> template. Is the path used to create the templates different >>>>>>>>>>>for >>>>>>>>>> different >>>>>>>>>>> Hypervisor templates ? I was under the assumption that the >>>>>> services >>>>>>>>>>> installed on all the system VM templates meant for different >>>>>>>>>> hypervisors >>>>>>>>>>> should be same ? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> No? Pl. see tools/appliance/systemvmtemplate/postinstall.sh, if >>>>>> it's >>>>>>>>>> there >>>>>>>>>> those pkgs will be installed. >>>>>>>>>> For the template I created, I had built it with veewee on my >>>>>> system >>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>>> then imported it in vmware fusion to install the vmware-tools. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Cheers. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> -abhi >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
