I've done some more work on the networking - it would be good if this could be tested.
I'll leave the issue open until I get some feedback that it looks ok. Please feel free to add other issues on github if you find other bugs. On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 10:20 AM, Rajani Karuturi <rajani.karut...@citrix.com> wrote: > oopss.. sorry.. didn't look at the issues list on github :) > > I will work on the mount issue. > > Thanks, > ~Rajani > > > > On 05-Feb-2014, at 3:16 pm, chris snow > <chsnow...@gmail.com<mailto:chsnow...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > Hi Rajani, > > Many thanks for the feedback. > > I still have to figure out the network setup - I have created an issue > on github to track this. > > There is also an open issue for the mount problem. > > https://github.com/snowch/devcloud/issues?state=open > > Please feel free to raise any other defects that you encounter. > > Many thanks, > > Chris > > > On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 7:33 AM, Rajani Karuturi > <rajani.karut...@citrix.com<mailto:rajani.karut...@citrix.com>> wrote: > Hi Chris, > > I tried this today on my machine(macbook 7,1) > It took nearly 1 hr 45 min for packer build+downloads. Once that is done, > when i did a vagrant up, saw the following mount error > [default] -- /vagrant > Failed to mount folders in Linux guest. This is usually beacuse > the "vboxsf" file system is not available. Please verify that > the guest additions are properly installed in the guest and > can work properly. The command attempted was: > > mount -t vboxsf -o uid=`id -u vagrant`,gid=`getent group vagrant | cut -d: > -f3` /vagrant /vagrant > mount -t vboxsf -o uid=`id -u vagrant`,gid=`id -g vagrant` /vagrant /vagrant > > Also, ssh > root@192.168.56.10<mailto:root@192.168.56.10><mailto:root@192.168.56.10> > wasn't working after it is up. I am however able to access it through vagrant > ssh. Did the ip change? > > Thanks, > ~Rajani > > > > On 05-Feb-2014, at 4:15 am, chris snow > <chsnow...@gmail.com<mailto:chsnow...@gmail.com><mailto:chsnow...@gmail.com>> > wrote: > > The xapi issue is fixed now. > > Next on the list: > > - The mysql root passwordless access is broken. > - Add additional network card. > > > On Sat, Feb 1, 2014 at 9:16 PM, chris snow > <chsnow...@gmail.com<mailto:chsnow...@gmail.com><mailto:chsnow...@gmail.com>> > wrote: > Thanks for the feedback Sebastien, it's much appreciated. > > I'll investigate in more detail over the next few days... > > On Sat, Feb 1, 2014 at 9:06 PM, Sebastien Goasguen > <run...@gmail.com<mailto:run...@gmail.com><mailto:run...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > On Feb 1, 2014, at 4:03 PM, Sebastien Goasguen > <run...@gmail.com<mailto:run...@gmail.com><mailto:run...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > On Jan 31, 2014, at 12:25 PM, chris snow > <chsnow...@gmail.com<mailto:chsnow...@gmail.com><mailto:chsnow...@gmail.com>> > wrote: > > I finally got the packer built devcloud box to boot with vagrant, but > running 'xe vm-list' in it results in: > > Error: Connection refused (calling connect ) > > I'm going to do some more investigation, but could take a while as I > get to learn xen. > > To make things easy while working on this I've created a github project here > [2] > > > I cloned it, the packer builds works and the vagrant export as well. > I was able to vagrant up/ssh. > > I noticed couple things. > > 1-the Xen setup. Check Rohit's blog http://bhaisaab.org he has a section on > DIY Devcloud, where he shows how to setup Xen, namely xapi toolstack and > creating a echo plugin.I think that's what you are missing, you can probably > add this to your posinstall script > > 2-We switched master to java 7, so you should switch to openjdk-7 > > 3- you might be missing a mysql-python-connector package and you should setup > the mysql password as null (for dev). > > > One more. It looks like there is only one interface (NAT), probably need to > play with the pressed.cfg to add a host only interface: > https://github.com/snowch/devcloud/blob/master/http/preseed.cfg > > This is looking quite nice :) > > I've added the problem above as an issue on github. > > --- > [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/XenServer/VirtualBox#Installing_XCP > [2] https://github.com/snowch/devcloud > > On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 7:18 AM, Rohit Yadav <rohit.ya...@citrix.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 4:14 AM, Sebastien Goasguen <run...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Jan 29, 2014, at 1:57 PM, chris snow <chsnow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I have started thinking about some options: > > 1) use packer to convert the devcloud2 veewee definition as a starting point > 2) create devcloud3 from scratch > 3) start with an existing packer definition (e.g. [1]) > > Do you have a view on which option may be most suitable? > > > My view would be to start from scratch but of course looking at what has been > done. > > In an ideal world, I would love to see a packer/vagrant file that would do: > > -Ubuntu and CentOS > -Xen and KVM > > That way we can decide on what to build. Of course there might be issues due > to the PV/HVM support in vbox and the OS chosen. > I don't recall what the issue was that made Rohit use Debian (but see > http://bhaisaab.org/logs/devcloud/), but ideally it would be good to use > stock ubuntu 12.04 or 13.04 > > DevCloud is just an appliance that facilitates a virtual host > (hypervisor) for development with CloudStack. So, I chose Debian > because well it's the best in terms of packages, stability, security > and is usually rock solid. Ubuntu at the time had a networking issue > that did not let me use xenbr0 for use over host-only network, I did > not invest much time on it but rather switched to Debian. > > I suggest we stick to Debian as it would be least painful for anyone > IMO and the problem we're trying to solve is to enable developers have > a robust (possibly multi-vm) hypervisor host in box (vm) over a > desktop virtualization platform (virtualbox, kvm etc.) > > (IMHO -- I wonder if you've tried latest rock-solid Fedora 20, Ubuntu > should have been least recommended distro by now don't use it please). > > I list 13.04 because there seems to be an issue with libvirt in 12.04 in the > case that you want ceph (http://ceph.com/docs/master/rbd/rbd-cloudstack/). Of > course ceph on a single node does not make sense, but for a devcloud3 setup > we could imagine setting up ceph in it and use it as primary storage. > > Why not build libvirt version we want? In case we want to stay updated > I can help you with Fedora 20 based base or Arch based base for > devcloud. I've been using Fedora for some months now and I guess if > someone want latest and greatest but want to avoid a lot of sysadmin > work as with Arch Linux just go with Fedora. Linux users (new and old) > have more or less been inclined to Debian because yum-based distros > were in really bad shape few years ago and that's when like others I > shifted to using Ubuntu. But it's not the case anymore and Ubuntu has > tons of problems now and rpm-based distros deserver one shot. > > > I mention KVM because if one uses VMware workstation than KVM would be an > option. > > What I am doing these days is taking a veewee bare definition and using > veewee-to-packer to get started with packer. I install chef/salt/puppet > agents in the image so that I can use the 3 of them if I want to. > > If we go with option 2 or 3, do you think debian 7.0 should be used as > a starting point, or another version such as 7.2 or 7.3? Or even > another distro? > > Feel free to choose whatever distro gives us all the tools and whatnot > to solve our problem. Distros and tools are not the problem having a > host in a box for CloudStack development is the problem. > > > Are these goals still valid for devcloud3? > > - Two network interfaces, host-only adapter so that the VM is > reachable from host os and a NAT so VMs can access Internet. > > This I guess will be most appreciated and useful for developers, > probably first time users and for demo. Last time for some reason, I > was unable to have Internet reach VMs inside DevCloud. > > > Yes > > - Can be used both as an all in one box solution like the original > DevCloud but the mgmt server and other services can run elsewhere (on > host os). > > This already works with last DevCloud. > > > Yes > > - Reduce resource requirements, so one could run it in 1G limit. > > +1 though I think size is not a major issue and reduce image size is a > good to have thing. > > > Would be great, but remember that systemvm and ttylinux will run within it, > so those 4 alone may use 1G > > - Allow multiple DevCloud VMs hosts. > > +1 > > > That would be great. Having some skeleton for multiple devcloud hosts in a > vagrant file so we can deploy "full" clouds. > > - x86 dom0 and xen-i386 so it runs on all host os. > - Reduce exported appliance (ova) file size. > - It should be seamless, it should work out of the box. > > +1 > > Chris, appreciate you taking time working on this. > > Regards. > > > yes > > > Are there any new requirements in addition to the ones discussed in > this email chain, e.g. > > - vagrant support (in addition to the ova/ovf image) > - packer and vagrant build environment > > > In simstack https://github.com/runseb/simstack I am trying to provide > chef/salt/puppet recipes for the install. So in devcloud3, I would lay things > out so that we can also do those 3 cfg mgt system in the future. Note that > simstack is not devcloud as I am trying to run the simulator and have to > compile from source because there is no simulator package. > > > Many thanks, > > Chris > > > [1] https://github.com/opscode/bento/tree/master/packer > > On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 2:25 PM, Sebastien Goasguen <run...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Jan 29, 2014, at 8:49 AM, Rohit Yadav <bhais...@apache.org> wrote: > > Thanks for stepping in. That is much needed, in fact I think we should > use something like packer alongwith vagrant/veewee for both devcloud > and systemvmtemplate. Veewee can build vms, packer can export them to > various platforms/formats and a developer could use vagrant for local > devcloud/host automation. > > > I looked into it the other day and I agree we need to revamp this. > > veewee development and maintenance is going to stop. So we need to prep a > packer version > > So yes we should create a packer definition for devcloud3 :) and be able to > post-process it to vagrant. > > > > Regards. > > On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 1:30 AM, chris snow <chsnow...@gmail.com> wrote: > I would like to build the devcloud2 image [1] from scratch using > veewee (or packer) and turn it into a vagrant box. > > There seems to be several versions of Vagrant files and veewee > definitions in the code base, making it difficult to know which one to > start from, or whether they are still valid. > > Many thanks, > > Chris > > [1] http://bhaisaab.org/logs/devcloud/ > > > > > -- > Check out my professional profile and connect with me on LinkedIn. > http://lnkd.in/cw5k69 > > > > > -- > Check out my professional profile and connect with me on LinkedIn. > http://lnkd.in/cw5k69 > > > > > > -- > Check out my professional profile and connect with me on LinkedIn. > http://lnkd.in/cw5k69 > > > > -- > Check out my professional profile and connect with me on LinkedIn. > http://lnkd.in/cw5k69 > > > > > -- > Check out my professional profile and connect with me on LinkedIn. > http://lnkd.in/cw5k69 > -- Check out my professional profile and connect with me on LinkedIn. http://lnkd.in/cw5k69
