Hello Iustin!
Thanks for your detailed description of upcoming plans, some comments
are inline.
On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 07:18:20pm +0200, Iustin Pop wrote:
Over the past 6 months, we have discussed (at length) on what is the
best direction for Ganeti, given that the current code-base, while
On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 04:40:43pm +0200, Iustin Pop wrote:
Things I'd like to see moving forwards in terms of features are
primarily better support for generic instances.
I am using ganeti to run a clients office, they have a nice pair of
Dell R210 II's and 8 VM's, all of different
On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 04:37:19pm +0200, Iustin Pop wrote:
I am sending this because I have started implementing some complementary
features concerning:
- IPv6 support
- rapi support
- public/private network separation
- management of conflicting IPs
- gateway-less networks
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 02:02:50PM +0300, Vangelis Koukis wrote:
On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 04:37:19pm +0200, Iustin Pop wrote:
I am sending this because I have started implementing some complementary
features concerning:
- IPv6 support
- rapi support
- public/private network
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 05:10:39am -0700, Iustin Pop wrote:
Understood, and thanks for the clarification, it's good to know what to
focus on integrating first.
Do you see this as a viable way forward?
Yes, definitely. If my plans are correct time-wise, we should be able to
cut devel-2.6
Comment #13 on issue 207 by alperh...@gmail.com: Ganeti fails to create
instance on Debian wheezy
http://code.google.com/p/ganeti/issues/detail?id=207
i was using the latest version of ganeti (2.5.0) with the following sha1sum
fd049c7bbdc73268b8f8940627a1e7299e7a55f4. Can you confirm the
Updates:
Status: Accepted
Comment #14 on issue 207 by ius...@google.com: Ganeti fails to create
instance on Debian wheezy
http://code.google.com/p/ganeti/issues/detail?id=207
Ah. We fixed _another_ issue with lvs output, but not the regex. Yes, that
will have to fixed too.
Thanks
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 12:36:40PM +0300, Vangelis Koukis wrote:
Hello Iustin!
Thanks for your detailed description of upcoming plans, some comments
are inline.
Hi Vangelis, thanks for the comments. I am definitely interested in your
(grnet's) comments, as you are our biggest contributors.
---
NEWS |3 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
diff --git a/NEWS b/NEWS
index 06b2f7d..444862c 100644
--- a/NEWS
+++ b/NEWS
@@ -20,6 +20,9 @@ Version 2.6.0 beta1
:pyeval:`luxi.REQ_QUERY_TAGS` are deprecated and will be removed in a
future version. :pyeval:`luxi.REQ_QUERY` should be
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 17:33, Iustin Pop ius...@google.com wrote:
---
NEWS | 3 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
diff --git a/NEWS b/NEWS
index 06b2f7d..444862c 100644
--- a/NEWS
+++ b/NEWS
@@ -20,6 +20,9 @@ Version 2.6.0 beta1
:pyeval:`luxi.REQ_QUERY_TAGS` are deprecated and
Per commit 0304f0e, newer LVM has extended the lv_attr field. However,
that commit was incomplete as we examine this attribute in another
place in the code.
Thanks to user alperhome, the _LVSLINE_REGEX in lib/backend.py also
needs fixing. I've used the same change as in the above commit: accept
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 18:37, Iustin Pop ius...@google.com wrote:
Per commit 0304f0e, newer LVM has extended the lv_attr field. However,
that commit was incomplete as we examine this attribute in another
place in the code.
Thanks to user alperhome, the _LVSLINE_REGEX in lib/backend.py also
Commit 30d25dd8 moved the htools code to new-style exception handling,
but the hconfd code hasn't been, which fails when compiling on newer
GHC version.
This patch does the rest of the move; however, the situation is not
very nice, we should have a better way to handle this (introduce
catchIO? or
13 matches
Mail list logo
