Hi Matthew, The rubygems issues look like they can be solved with Mo's help. The policykit stuff is more tricky, mainly because I have no idea how it works, so I really need help here. Here are the problems I'm currently facing: 1. I'm working on a minimal install to make sure I pull the right dependencies (including qemu etc.), but I need an auth agent for polkit, should I have a dependency on pkexec? 2. Every time the vagrant command is invoked, the user needs to connect to qemu:///system, may have to change virtual networks (destroy/create), change some NFS shares and firewall rules. What's the best way to manage all that, should I provide a custom policy (how do I create it?), maybe as an option? Should I create a vagrant group with some privileges? Or give them to the wheel group? Will it create security issues on the system?
Maybe solving point 1 is enough to have a working vagrant-kvm environment, but the issues in 2 hinder the usability of Vagrant (because you have to authenticate during the command execution) and makes vagrant-kvm not as fluid as with VirtualBox. My goal has been from the beginning to provide the full Vagrant experience using KVM, so I hope we can solve that. Alex ----- Original Message ----- From: "Matthew Miller" <[email protected]> To: "Fedora Cloud SIG" <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, 23 September, 2013 2:29:23 PM Subject: Re: Vagrant in Fedora On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 08:37:33AM -0400, Alexandre Drahon wrote: > nothing engineering related), I wrote the vagrant-kvm plugin on my spare > time to make it work on my Fedora laptop, though there's now a (much more > qualified) second maintainer who is also providing support for Ubuntu > through a PPA. Matthew asked me if I wanted to work on packaging Vagrant > and the KVM plugin for Fedora 20, and I foolishly accepted ;) Hi Alex. Thanks so much for letting me trick you into doing this. :) > 1. I have a vagrant RPM that installs and works as expected, there's some > minimal patching involved which has to do with the fact that Vagrant > expect to be running in it's own Ruby 1.9.3 environment in /opt Excellent! > 2. There was also some patching involved to make the plugin system work, > although I haven't tested plugins extensively (some stuff breaks like > rubygems loading path) and providing common plugins as RPMs looks like the > better way in Fedora. Are there some in particular we should be looking at? Maybe we can get other people to chip in there once the base package is in. > 3. I had to build my own rubygems-childprocess (current Fedora package is > very old) and rubygems-log4r (not provided in Fedora) RPMs, but I don't > know how I should submit them (package review ticket?). There's a existing > ticket for log4r https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=905240 , I > added it as a dependency to the Vagrant ticket. It looks like Mo Morsi is an approved committer for that package https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/rubygem-childprocess and could maybe add you as a co-maintainer too. Mo just responded to this thread in another post so that seems like a good possibility. :) > 4. I've packaged vagrant-kvm as a RPM and it installs, but I'm running > into serious issues with Policykit. I don't think I'll be able to solve > that without help, I'm not even sure what's the right way to do it. I used to know all about policykit but it has changed a lot in newer versions. I know who to ask, though, for anything beyond what I can help with -- Miloslav Trmač (mitr) is the current RH maintainer. What's the issue? > Looks pretty good, right? Absolutely! -- Matthew Miller ☁☁☁ Fedora Cloud Architect ☁☁☁ <[email protected]> _______________________________________________ cloud mailing list [email protected] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
_______________________________________________ cloud mailing list [email protected] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
