Re: [VOTE][ACS44]Apache CloudStack 4.4.1 RC 3 in branch 4.4-RC20141014T2316

no, the release is on that branch not on the 4.4 branch. We could rename the branch if needed. putting the tag on 4.4 would make it either a 4.4.1-SNAPSHOT or a 4.4.2-SNAPSHOT depending on where on the branch we put the tag. On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 10:54 PM, Rohit Yadav wrote: > Hi Daan, > > Can

Re: [VOTE][ACS44]Apache CloudStack 4.4.1 RC 3 in branch 4.4-RC20141014T2316

Hi Daan, > On 20-Oct-2014, at 1:02 pm, Daan Hoogland wrote: > > no, the release is on that branch not on the 4.4 branch. We could rename > the branch if needed. putting the tag on 4.4 would make it either a > 4.4.1-SNAPSHOT or a 4.4.2-SNAPSHOT depending on where on the branch we put > the tag. I

Re: [VOTE][ACS44]Apache CloudStack 4.4.1 RC 3 in branch 4.4-RC20141014T2316

take a look in build_asf.sh I changed it to not have to revert RCs in case they didn't pass. Also if issues are only packaging we could stay on the branch. I saw this practice wasn't promoted to master and hence 4.5 but i think it should. Unless we go with your proposal of not snapshotting of cours

Re: Primary Storage Allocated issue

Hello I have tried this and set expunge.interval and expunge.delay to 120 on weekend. But it wasn't helpful. Old VMs (not all but some of them) still present in VMware environment. Looks like I am need to create a bug. Is the any way to correctly remove them from CloudStack? Just several examp

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: debian: Fix changelog to use 4.4.1 releas...

GitHub user bhaisaab opened a pull request: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/24 debian: Fix changelog to use 4.4.1 release with snapshot in the version ... Both 4.4.0 and 4.4.1 tagged releases have -snapshot in debian/changelog resulting in debian package names which should

Re: [VOTE][ACS44]Apache CloudStack 4.4.1 RC 3 in branch 4.4-RC20141014T2316

Hi, There are multiple issues to report; - Both 4.4.0 and 4.4.1 tags are not on 4.4 branch, we can leave them as you say the trend now is to not put tags on branch. I personally think it would bug because I had always assumed the tag was in the release branch. But then does that mean you want

Re: System VM build job slaves are down

Hi Rayees, On Oct 17, 2014, at 2:39 AM, Rayees Namathponnan wrote: > I have restored Citrix systemvm build machine and added as slave in > Jenkins.buildacloud.org; node “systemvmbuilder" Great! > Systemvm builds hung, while copying "VBoxGuestAdditions_4.2.6.iso" from > Jenkins master, > >

[PROPOSAL] Remove SNAPSHOT from versioning and keep tags on the release branch

Hi, Background: Whenever we start on a new release and cut its release branch, for example 4.5 branch, we add the -SNAPSHOT string to the version string in pom.xmls, debian/changelog and elsewhere. Just this mere action adds a divergence between release and master branches and between two mino

Re: [PROPOSAL] Remove SNAPSHOT from versioning and keep tags on the release branch

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 10/20/2014 12:33 PM, Rohit Yadav wrote: > Hi, > > Background: > > Whenever we start on a new release and cut its release branch, for > example 4.5 branch, we add the -SNAPSHOT string to the version > string in pom.xmls, debian/changelog and elsewh

Re: [PROPOSAL] Move to github PR only during moratorium on commit

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 10/18/2014 11:00 AM, sebgoa wrote: > After [1] I would like to officially bring up the following > proposal. > > [Proposal] All commits come through github PR, *even* for > committers. We declare a moratorium period (agreed suspension of > act

Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: debian: Fix changelog to use 4.4.1 releas...

While you are at it Rohit, would it be possible to improve the tools that set version here and there to include this ( to prevent future issues )? I guess that would have to go to master and 4.5 as well -- Erik On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 12:26 PM, bhaisaab wrote: > GitHub user bhaisaab opened a p

Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: debian: Fix changelog to use 4.4.1 releas...

I think we just need to change build_asf script, can you share if there is any improvement/tool you would like to see? The debian/changelog need to be manually fixed since it needs to have a block of information including release maintainer name, email, timestamp, package name and version which

RE: merging versus cherry-picking

I am +1 on using github. I am +1 on all code changes being reviewed by a committer other than the author, as well as undergoing some automated CI testing, before the pull request is merged. I am +0 on only the master RM merging the pull request. I don't want the author to push the code, but I

RE: master broken

If you use github and travis, the way the integration works is that travis builds and tests the code on your own private fork when you submit a pull request. So the results of that inform the decision on whether to accept the pull request into the code. -- Stephen Turner -Original Messag

RE: [PROPOSAL] Move to github PR only during moratorium on commit

As I just said in the other thread -- but to repeat it here in the PROPOSAL thread -- I am +1 on using github pull requests. I am +1 on all code changes being reviewed by a committer other than the author, as well as undergoing some automated CI testing, before the pull request is merged. I a

Review Request 26923: CLOUDSTACK-7752: Management Server goes in infinite loop while creating a vm with tagged local data disk when the pool is not tagged

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/26923/ --- Review request for cloudstack, Devdeep Singh and Prachi Damle. Repository: clou

Re: [PROPOSAL] Remove SNAPSHOT from versioning and keep tags on the release branch

+1 as well -- Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology! Nux! www.nux.ro - Original Message - > From: "Wido den Hollander" > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Sent: Monday, 20 October, 2014 11:35:14 > Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Remove SNAPSHOT from versioning and keep tags on the >

Re: [PROPOSAL] Remove SNAPSHOT from versioning and keep tags on the release branch

On Oct 20, 2014, at 12:35 PM, Wido den Hollander wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 10/20/2014 12:33 PM, Rohit Yadav wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Background: >> >> Whenever we start on a new release and cut its release branch, for >> example 4.5 branch, we add the -SNAPSHO

Re: [PROPOSAL] Move to github PR only during moratorium on commit

On Oct 20, 2014, at 1:51 PM, Stephen Turner wrote: > As I just said in the other thread -- but to repeat it here in the PROPOSAL > thread -- > > I am +1 on using github pull requests. > > I am +1 on all code changes being reviewed by a committer other than the > author, as well as undergoing

Re: [VOTE][ACS44]Apache CloudStack 4.4.1 RC 3 in branch 4.4-RC20141014T2316

Rohit, this was discussed on list. I intentionally branched in order not to have reverts for failed RCs in the release branch. I don't care either way but there was a trend to go this way (deleting branches of RCs that got voted out). as said we can rename the branch now to GA-4.4.1 and delete any

Re: merging versus cherry-picking

like you comments Stephen +1 Daan On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 1:25 PM, Stephen Turner wrote: > I am +1 on using github. > > I am +1 on all code changes being reviewed by a committer other than the > author, as well as undergoing some automated CI testing, before the pull > request is merged. > > I

Re: [PROPOSAL] Move to github PR only during moratorium on commit

+1 and small changes should go through even if bigger goals glare on the horizon. On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 2:14 PM, sebgoa wrote: > > On Oct 20, 2014, at 1:51 PM, Stephen Turner > wrote: > > > As I just said in the other thread -- but to repeat it here in the > PROPOSAL thread -- > > > > I am +1

Re: [PROPOSAL] Remove SNAPSHOT from versioning and keep tags on the release branch

When working with multiple environments with various installation of Cloudstack (in labs) the -SNAPSHOT tell me that it's the non released version currently running. That's helpful once the release is GA to know if's the the GA version in place or not. Having the -SNAPSHOT remove the confusion ar

Re: [PROPOSAL] Remove SNAPSHOT from versioning and keep tags on the release branch

Keep in mind there is a maven issue here. It is mainly in the devs env so not really important there but in a operators lab like Pierre-Luc's it is an added inconvenience. Like him I won't -1. It would solve what I have been solving with rc branches of the release branch. On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 3

xenserver 6.5

Does anybody (know of) work on supporting xenserver 6.5 or has an idea of how much effort that is going to be? -- Daan

Re: [VOTE][ACS44]Apache CloudStack 4.4.1 RC 3 in branch 4.4-RC20141014T2316

Yeah, the systemvm issue is kind of embarrassing, but not critical. Let's make sure it's clearly said in the release upgrade notes. Ideally it should be fixed if anyone can spare the time and effort. Lucian -- Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology! Nux! www.nux.ro - Original M

Re: [PROPOSAL] Remove SNAPSHOT from versioning and keep tags on the release branch

Hi Pierre, Thanks for sharing. I think in your use case, if you’re using debian packages you can take the source and add a package release with suitable names in debian/changelog; in case of rpms you can add a tag/build-version (like 4.4.1.20141020). What I’m proposing is to remove using -snaps

Re: [VOTE][ACS44]Apache CloudStack 4.4.1 RC 3 in branch 4.4-RC20141014T2316

Hi Daan, I built 4.4.1 today using the tag and also 4.4.0 previously, see here: http://packages.bhaisaab.org/cloudstack/upstream/debian/4.4/ The version string still has a -snapshot on it, because .snapshot was not removed in debian/changelog For reference: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/

RE: xenserver 6.5

I think it should be minimal, because although there are large internal changes (e.g., 3.x kernel, 64-bit dom0, new Xen, new storage datapath, PVHVM mode for RHEL/CentOS 7), the interface is essentially unchanged. -- Stephen Turner -Original Message- From: Daan Hoogland [mailto:daan.h

[ACS4.5] RE: xenserver 6.5

Hi, We did some preliminary validation with ACS 4.5 and XS 6.5 (Beta release versions) in our labs and it is working fine with no blocker issues. Besides the features listed by Stephen below, some additional guest OS are introduced in this release. Thanks /Sudha -Original Message- F

Re: [PROPOSAL] Remove SNAPSHOT from versioning and keep tags on the release branch

I'll chime in from a purely build engineer/maven user perspective. Adding -SNAPSHOT to the version indicates a certain perspective on the part of the build system. If you are using a system like Artifactory to store the output artifacts it allows tracking how many snapshot versions to keep, if snap

Re: [PROPOSAL] Move to github PR only during moratorium on commit

I'm in complete agreement with Stephen on this one. I would be considered the master RM could be overwhelmed with work. Other than that +1. On 20 October 2014 14:13, Daan Hoogland wrote: > +1 and small changes should go through even if bigger goals glare on the > horizon. > > On Mon, Oct 20, 201

RE: xenserver 6.5

Out of interest, on the assumption that there are no issues with using 6.5 when it's released and there are no backwards-compatibility problems, will it then work with 4.4.1 or does CS need to be *explicitly* told that newer, effectively unknown versions are 'acceptable' as a valid hypervisor? Basi

Re: [PROPOSAL] Remove SNAPSHOT from versioning and keep tags on the release branch

On Oct 20, 2014, at 6:07 PM, Nate Gordon wrote: > I'll chime in from a purely build engineer/maven user perspective. Adding > -SNAPSHOT to the version indicates a certain perspective on the part of the > build system. If you are using a system like Artifactory to store the > output artifacts it

Re: xenserver 6.5

Adrian, It should be a db insert. (hope i'm not missing anything) On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 6:18 PM, Adrian Lewis wrote: > Out of interest, on the assumption that there are no issues with using 6.5 > when it's released and there are no backwards-compatibility problems, will > it then work with 4.4

Re: xenserver 6.5

Someone correct me if I'm wrong but, if a previous XenServer resource class can handle the newer version of XenServer, then I don't think you need to make any changes to CloudStack files to use that newer version. If you do see some incompatibility with that version of XenServer, then someone woul

Re: [PROPOSAL] Remove SNAPSHOT from versioning and keep tags on the release branch

That's right Nate tech decisions (not releases) are open for everyone so thanks for your opinion. I'd rather have the build process add the -SNAPSHOT then have it hardcoded in our sources. On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 6:38 PM, sebgoa wrote: > > On Oct 20, 2014, at 6:07 PM, Nate Gordon wrote: > > >

Re: [VOTE][ACS44]Apache CloudStack 4.4.1 RC 3 in branch 4.4-RC20141014T2316

Rohit, Am I right in my conclusion that this pr only contains a change to a changelog file? Why this PR? On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 4:08 PM, Rohit Yadav wrote: > Hi Daan, > > I built 4.4.1 today using the tag and also 4.4.0 previously, see here: > http://packages.bhaisaab.org/cloudstack/upstream/d

Re: [VOTE][ACS44]Apache CloudStack 4.4.1 RC 3 in branch 4.4-RC20141014T2316

> On 20-Oct-2014, at 10:19 pm, Daan Hoogland wrote: > > Rohit, > > Am I right in my conclusion that this pr only contains a change to a > changelog file? Why this PR? Did n’t we agree to send changes via PR? Regards, Rohit Yadav Software Architect, ShapeBlue M. +91 88 262 30892 | rohit.ya...@s

Re: xenserver 6.5

I know that master had a bunch of cleanup work to make things work better (commits were a month ago), but baring any significant issues, being able to support a newer XenServer should be as simple as a database update. So net of this master *today* should work fine with 6.5 (and the various pre-re

Re: [PROPOSAL] Move to github PR only during moratorium on commit

On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 11:00 AM, sebgoa wrote: > After [1] I would like to officially bring up the following proposal. > > [Proposal] > > All commits come through github PR, *even* for committers. We declare a > moratorium period (agreed suspension of activity) during which direct > commit

Re: [PROPOSAL] Move to github PR only during moratorium on commit

Won’t this proposal make GitHub the canonical repository? I don’t see ASF infra being too happy with that. From: sebgoa mailto:run...@gmail.com>> Reply-To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org" mailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org>> Date: Saturday, October 18, 2014 at 2:00 AM

Re: [PROPOSAL] Remove SNAPSHOT from versioning and keep tags on the release branch

On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 12:33 PM, Rohit Yadav wrote: > Hi, > > Background: > > Whenever we start on a new release and cut its release branch, for example > 4.5 branch, we add the -SNAPSHOT string to the version string in pom.xmls, > debian/changelog and elsewhere. Just this mere action adds a div

Re: xenserver 6.5

Tim, these changes are needed? so 4.4.1 will not work with db changes... Do you have a commit id? On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 6:54 PM, Tim Mackey wrote: > I know that master had a bunch of cleanup work to make things work better > (commits were a month ago), but baring any significant issues, being

Re: [VOTE][ACS44]Apache CloudStack 4.4.1 RC 3 in branch 4.4-RC20141014T2316

Yes, but I don't see a significant change here, only a comment. Since 4.4.1 is frozen that would go in 4.4.2. Only this comment doesn't warrant it. of course we can put it on the rc branch On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 6:53 PM, Rohit Yadav wrote: > > > On 20-Oct-2014, at 10:19 pm, Daan Hoogland > wro

Re: [PROPOSAL] Move to github PR only during moratorium on commit

On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 7:26 PM, Chiradeep Vittal < chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com> wrote: > Won’t this proposal make GitHub the canonical repository? I don’t see ASF > infra being too happy with that. > > Shouldn't have to, you can still merge/push to the ASF infra repository and only the PR would l

Re: xenserver 6.5

Yeah, Tim, I'm a little unclear of what you mean by requiring a DB update. Can you clarify that? Thanks! On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 11:29 AM, Daan Hoogland wrote: > Tim, these changes are needed? so 4.4.1 will not work with db changes... Do > you have a commit id? > > On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 6:54

Re: [PROPOSAL] Move to github PR only during moratorium on commit

No Chiradeep, Pull of the request will still be on the local committer repo and pushed to ASF infra (wip) On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 7:26 PM, Chiradeep Vittal < chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com> wrote: > Won’t this proposal make GitHub the canonical repository? I don’t see ASF > infra being too happy wit

Re: [PROPOSAL] Move to github PR only during moratorium on commit

Thanks. Question for Sebastien then. The argument is that this new proposal will avoid problems such as - broken builds. Presumably this is test failures (don’t recall a compile-time failure). How exactly would this be achieved WITHOUT a CI process? - delayed releases. Not sure how this fixes

Re: xenserver 6.5

Daan, Here are the relevant commits: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=commit;h=2be02d1f515d8d089b6596127614fe6b8030d723 https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=commit;h=b7f5e95c8f17cf42d35705872b4210db8c2def72 https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=

Re: xenserver 6.5

thanks Tim, from this I take that hypervisor versions are hardcoded still, and xenserver 6.5 is supported since 4.5. correct? On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 8:36 PM, Tim Mackey wrote: > Daan, > > Here are the relevant commits: > > > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=commit;h=2b

Re: xenserver 6.5

Correct on both counts On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 2:55 PM, Daan Hoogland wrote: > thanks Tim, from this I take that hypervisor versions are hardcoded still, > and xenserver 6.5 is supported since 4.5. correct? > > On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 8:36 PM, Tim Mackey wrote: > > > Daan, > > > > Here are the

RE: Help in Adding XenServer to CS Management Server

Hi, I have been trying hard to get this up and running but have no luck so far. I have refereed to this troubleshooting guide for system vms: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/SSVM,+templates,+Secondary+storage+troubleshooting The SSVM and CPVM are running but I don't see

Re: Unreleased 4.4.1 packages on cloudstack.apt-get.eu, why?

Guys.. for crying out loud.. who put the 4.4.1 rpms back and regenerated the repodata? I wouldn't normally care, but this repo is advertised in many places, people have it installed, it will get used ... with unreleased, buggy software ... Please make another directory or something. :( -- Sent

Re: Unreleased 4.4.1 packages on cloudstack.apt-get.eu, why?

4.4.1 passed a vote Its possible they are genuine. The repodata is generated on a cronjob. On 20 October 2014 21:43, Nux! wrote: > Guys.. for crying out loud.. who put the 4.4.1 rpms back and regenerated > the repodata? > I wouldn't normally care, but this repo is advertised in many places,

Re: Unreleased 4.4.1 packages on cloudstack.apt-get.eu, why?

On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 10:43 PM, Nux! wrote: > Guys.. for crying out loud.. who put the 4.4.1 rpms back and regenerated > the repodata? > I wouldn't normally care, but this repo is advertised in many places, > people have it installed, it will get used ... with unreleased, buggy > software ... >

Re: Unreleased 4.4.1 packages on cloudstack.apt-get.eu, why?

I did. This time they should be there. For convenience,that is. Op 20 okt. 2014 22:49 schreef "Erik Weber" : > On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 10:43 PM, Nux! wrote: > > > Guys.. for crying out loud.. who put the 4.4.1 rpms back and regenerated > > the repodata? > > I wouldn't normally care, but this repo

Re: Unreleased 4.4.1 packages on cloudstack.apt-get.eu, why?

me on a device with keyboard; I put them back after rebuilding them with the tag for the approved commit. I was holding of on the announce to let the mirrors sync and to make a good announcement together with Sally and Pierre-Luc. kind regards, On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 10:51 PM, Daan Hoogland wro

Re: [PROPOSAL] Move to github PR only during moratorium on commit

On Oct 20, 2014, at 8:28 PM, Chiradeep Vittal wrote: > Thanks. Question for Sebastien then. The argument is that this new proposal > will avoid problems such as > - broken builds. Presumably this is test failures (don’t recall a > compile-time failure). How exactly would this be achieved WIT

Re: Unreleased 4.4.1 packages on cloudstack.apt-get.eu, why?

meh, ok :) -- Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology! Nux! www.nux.ro - Original Message - > From: "Daan Hoogland" > To: "dev" > Sent: Monday, 20 October, 2014 22:05:05 > Subject: Re: Unreleased 4.4.1 packages on cloudstack.apt-get.eu, why? > me on a device with keyboard;

failed 430-440 upgrade: Unable to start instance due to Unable to get answer that is of class com.cloud.agent.api.StartAnswer

Hi guys, I've followed the 4.3.x to 4.4.0 upgrade instruction to the letter and it has worked, except the last step which failed to restart my system VMs. Now I'm on 4.4.0 without any system VMs; they are stuck in a creation loop which never succeeds. Relevant management log: Job failed due to

Re: failed 430-440 upgrade: Unable to start instance due to Unable to get answer that is of class com.cloud.agent.api.StartAnswer

On 10/21/2014 12:25 AM, Nux! wrote: > Hi guys, > > I've followed the 4.3.x to 4.4.0 upgrade instruction to the letter and it has > worked, except the last step which failed to restart my system VMs. Now I'm > on 4.4.0 without any system VMs; they are stuck in a creation loop which > never suc

Re: failed 430-440 upgrade: Unable to start instance due to Unable to get answer that is of class com.cloud.agent.api.StartAnswer

Wido, Alas DEBUG is on without telling me anything I can understand. Here's some more: http://pastebin.com/raw.php?i=cYf8g5tg -- Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology! Nux! www.nux.ro - Original Message - > From: "Wido den Hollander" > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Sent

Re: failed 430-440 upgrade: Unable to start instance due to Unable to get answer that is of class com.cloud.agent.api.StartAnswer

I think the problem may be with: "2014-10-20 23:47:57,319 DEBUG [kvm.resource.LibvirtConnection] (agentRequest-Handler-3:null) can't find connection: KVM, for vm: v-439-VM, continue" What would this mean in English? -- Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology! Nux! www.nux.ro -

Re: failed 430-440 upgrade: Unable to start instance due to Unable to get answer that is of class com.cloud.agent.api.StartAnswer

Well, reverted my upgrade and went for 4.3.1 which looks good, will try again with 4.4.1 tomorrow night. Cheers for the help -- Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology! Nux! www.nux.ro - Original Message - > From: "Nux!" > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Sent: Monday, 20 Oc

Re: [PROPOSAL] Move to github PR only during moratorium on commit

Here is my experience with pull request on github for documentation: as non comiter it is very easy for a one time pull request. But, because ACS github repo is a mirror, next PR from the same fork branch almost never worked because initial PR add a merge commit which is not in the fork branch. I

Re: [PROPOSAL] Move to github PR only during moratorium on commit

I like the way Stephen split it. Here is my vote. +1 on using github pull requests. +1 on compulsory code reviews and PRs even for committers and CI build pass before merging. +1 on merges from 4.5 to master and no individual commits(or cherry-picks) to the branches +0 on RM for master and commits

Re: Help in Adding XenServer to CS Management Server

Is the SSVM Agent UP? (check 9 and 10 in the wiki) Did you check secstorage.allowed.internal.sites config value? (point 6 in the wiki) ~Rajani On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 1:20 AM, Ritu Sabharwal wrote: > Hi, > > I have been trying hard to get this up and running but have no luck so far. > > I have

Re: [PROPOSAL] Move to github PR only during moratorium on commit

Code reviews are great. However, we will need to change our behavior quite a bit if code is to make it in within a reasonable amount of time as code reviews today often don't get done in a timely fashion. In a volunteer community, it's hard to "assign" work (including code reviews) to people (let

Re: Review Request 26871: CLOUDSTACK-7748: Cloudstack version number is missing in system vm template.

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/26871/#review57549 --- Ship it! - Kishan Kavala On Oct. 17, 2014, 11 p.m., Harikrishna P

Re: Review Request 26871: CLOUDSTACK-7748: Cloudstack version number is missing in system vm template.

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/26871/ --- (Updated Oct. 21, 2014, 6:09 a.m.) Review request for cloudstack, Kishan Kavala

Error while deploying System VMs

Hello all, I set up CS on latest master code, and I observe error while starting the system VMs. Also, the secondary storage is shown as 0/0 on Dashboard. I can see the error while mounting secondary storage, could not identify the cause. I have executed cloud-install-sys-tmplt command it success

RE: Error while deploying System VMs

If you dashboard is showing 0/0 that means the secondary storage has not been successfully added. What error do you get while adding secondary storage? Is there anything else in the logs besides the stack trace you have shared? Regards, Devdeep > -Original Message- > From: Ashutosh Kelk