On Jun 20, 2014, at 12:13 PM, Rohit Yadav <bhais...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 10:15 PM, Carlos Reátegui <create...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hi Rohit, >> >> On Jun 19, 2014, at 11:30 PM, Rohit Yadav <bhais...@apache.org> wrote: >> >>> Hi Carlos, >>> >>> On Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 4:17 AM, Carlos Reategui <car...@reategui.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Rohit, >>>> Thanks for the info, but I was asking about the non-oss. Is that >> included >>>> in Wido's released versions? >>>> >>> >>> This is oss (I checked the 4.3 release debs, and could not find vmware >> jars >>> and other non-oss stuff). >>> >> Thanks for checking... I guess I could have done that. >> >>> >>>> >>>> I'm assuming the zip file you linked below will give me the same as: >>>> git checkout remotes/origin/4.4 >>>> >>> >>> Yes :) >>> >>> >>>> Also, what is the issue with tomcat 6.0.35? I just noticed that my >>>> Management Server is running the default Ubuntu tomcat6 which is 6.0.35. >>>> Are all versions of CloudStack affected? >>>> >>> >>> Historically we've been using 6.0.33, we need to revisit it. For now I >>> would recommend you to use Tomcat 6.0.33. >> How do you recommend dealing with the tomcat6 dependency check in the >> cloudstack install? I found 6.0.32 debs here: >> https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/precise/amd64/tomcat6/6.0.32-5ubuntu1 would >> those be ok? Should I build my own? I am assuming these instructions >> should work for ubuntu: >> http://plone.uconn.edu/workspaces/uits-linux/standard-operating-procedures-sop/packaging-tomcat-6-for-debian > > > I think 6.0.32 would work. I build from source and run using maven so I > don't use debian/rpms builds myself, whether using 6.0.35 or 6.0.32 from > default repo will work (it may); just try them both, the worst case would > be that it will fail after which you can try building your own. I have been running 4.1.1 since last year on 6.0.35 without any issues that I can tell. I tried searching for the issues with .35 but can’t find anything concrete. The build docs just say there is a known issue but don’t specify what that is. Anyone know what this known issue is? I see this as a bigger documentation/installation problem as the install docs don’t mention how to get around this dependency. If you just follow the instructions you end up with .35 on ubuntu 12.04. > > Any debian user/sysadmin want to comment here? > > Regards. > > >> >> >>> >>> Thanks for filing the doc bug. >> No prob. I wold have made the changes myself but wasn't sure what the >> preferred solution for the above dependency should be. >> >>> >>> Regards. >>> >> <snip>
