Actually, we generally want os64Bit=true but hey. =) I actually have a patch-in-progress with an option for 64 bit, so I'll defer that 'til we can do this instead.
A. On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 8:29 AM, Adrian Cole <[email protected]> wrote: > Whoops os64Bit=false, I meant. > On Aug 15, 2012 8:29 AM, "Adrian Cole" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Yeah. I think this can help with yarn testing, too. Ex. > > osFamily=CENTOS,osFamily64Bit=false > > > > I'll work it up, now. > > On Aug 15, 2012 8:17 AM, "Andrew Bayer" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> Sounds just fine to me. > >> > >> A. > >> > >> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 7:49 AM, Adrian Cole <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >> > +1 to getting 0.8.0 out soon. Id like to make a trivial update, if > >> > possible. > >> > > >> > Right now, using private clouds can only be by image id. I'd like to > >> skip > >> > the hardcoding of ubuntu 10.04, if someone sets the property > >> > whirr.template. > >> > > >> > Ex. > >> > > >> > whirr.template=osFamily=CENTOS > >> > > >> > This would directly defer to the jclouds TemplateBuilderSpec logic. > If > >> we > >> > did this, it would be easy to support vcloud. VCloud does have is > >> family > >> > info in the API, just not version. > >> > Ex. osFamily=UBUNTU can work on any base vCloud that has an image of > it, > >> > but osFamily=UBUNTU,osVersionMatches=10.04 will not. > >> > > >> > I would also sign up to edit the doc page, and could do this today. > Any > >> > against? > >> > > >> > -A > >> > On Aug 14, 2012 4:40 PM, "Andrew Bayer" <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > > >> > > So I'd like to cross off two more bugs (as well as bumping to > jclouds > >> > > beta.10 and Tom looking into the YARN config error in tests) and > then > >> cut > >> > > an RC: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WHIRR-604 and > >> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WHIRR-612. I've spent today > >> > beating > >> > > those guys up, and now have 'em working properly such that I'm > running > >> > > tests with basically the same results (modulo a little weirdness in > >> core, > >> > > where jclouds.endpoint ends up not being used) on EC2, Rackspace > (old > >> > gen - > >> > > next gen apparently isn't going to have reverse-resolvable IPs for > at > >> > least > >> > > a while. blergh) and our internal Cloudstack setup. > >> > > > >> > > Once those are reviewed and committed and Tom has looked at the YARN > >> > thing, > >> > > I'd like to go ahead with the RC. Does anyone else have any > immediate > >> > > pressing things they'd like to get in? The idea here is to get 0.8.0 > >> out > >> > > ASAP, and be able to turn around 0.8.1 as fast as needed after that. > >> > > Iteration, iteration, iteration. =) > >> > > > >> > > A. > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >
