On 16-Dec-2012, at 1:31 PM, Chip Childers <chip.child...@sungard.com> wrote:
> 2 things: > > Yes, I need to update my fork. I'll try to get to that this week. > > Second, I have an untested theory that we should be able to figure out > how to avoid the fork by building vagrant plugins / extensions instead > of patching the project itself. To me, if possible, this is the ideal > scenario. Thanks Chip pl. do that, I would too go for the plugin/extension if possible, would save us from maintaining the fork. Regards. > > - chip > > Sent from my iPhone. > > On Dec 16, 2012, at 3:21 PM, Rohit Yadav <rohit.ya...@citrix.com> wrote: > >> I'm running OSX 10.8 too, but using either vagrant forks it fails for me but >> I think I understand why it fails for me now; >> Chip's fork failed with the reason that vbox 4.2 was not supported, and the >> upstream fork failed because of the "with_ssh" option. >> >> I think if Chip can help us pull in latest changes from vagrant upstream and >> provide drivers for vbox 4.x, it may work. I checked, so the current >> upstream git repo has no drivers, I think somehow they got rid of it. >> About the nic issue, the order should not matter, just that I'm not sure >> what happens to the instances running on xen, as they would have br0 as >> default nic to talk to which is nat so make things tricky. >> Nevertheless, host-only is reachable via nat. Can you confirm that the >> xenbox that is built on your system works fine as a devcloud appliance with >> CloudStack? >> >> Regards. >> >> ________________________________________ >> From: James Martin [jmar...@basho.com] >> Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2012 10:21 PM >> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org >> Subject: Re: Review Request: cleanup devcloud creation process >> >> On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 4:01 PM, Rohit Yadav <rohit.ya...@citrix.com> wrote: >>> For me xenbox build fails because of virtualbox and some vagrant param >>> error which I was not able to figure out why. It's a different problem for >>> me, I could n't even see the box being built. I'll try with debian wheezy >>> as well (the devcloud appliance I published was created out of wheezy). >> >> What OS are you running? I'm using OSX 10.8, and didn't experience >> these issues. Please post the errors you encountered. >> >>> >>> Also, can be switch to the default vagrant repo >>> (https://github.com/mitchellh/vagrant) because maintaining a fork can be a >>> lot of work and avoid using two versions of vagrant which I saw in deps/. >> >> >> This is the reason you can't use the default vagrant repo, as outlined >> here : >> http://www.chipchilders.com/blog/2012/8/14/automatically-building-devcloud-images-for-apache-cloudstack.html >> >> "Vagrant requires the use of the Virtual Box Guest Additions for many >> of it's features. Unfortunately, we were unable to get the Guest >> Additions kernel module to load correctly when the VM booted into the >> Xen Server configuration. The puppet provisioner module relies on >> VirtualBox shared folders, which don't function without that properly >> loaded Guest Additions kernel module. Since we were trying to use the >> Vagrant Puppet provisioner, we were stuck. To get around that, Edison >> modified the Vagrant core code itself, so that it could use a >> "with_ssh" option for it's puppet provisioner to SCP files onto the >> VM. >> >> We also had an issue with guest OS identification within Vagrant. Even >> though we had added a new OS type (xen), there were problems getting >> Vagrant to skip it's attempt to mount shared folders. You can see the >> changes that were required in Vagrant if you check out the hacked >> version of Vagrant on Github." >> >> >>> For the basebox, the nic settings are fine. But for xenbox we'll need two >>> nics, nic1:host-only and nic2:nat. >> >> This will not work with vagrant. As documented here: >> https://github.com/mitchellh/vagrant/issues/641: >> >> "The first NIC is always a NAT. Vagrant requires it that way." Based >> on that requirement, we will have to adapt devcloud to use eth0 as NAT >> and eth1 as Host Only. >> >> >> - James >> >>> >>> Thank you for your work. >>> Rohit >>> ________________________________________ >>> From: James Martin [nore...@reviews.apache.org] On Behalf Of James Martin >>> [jmar...@basho.com] >>> Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2012 10:52 PM >>> To: Prasanna Santhanam; Rohit Yadav >>> Cc: cloudstack; James Martin >>> Subject: Re: Review Request: cleanup devcloud creation process >>> >>>> On Dec. 15, 2012, 3:39 a.m., Rohit Yadav wrote: >>>>> Pfew, took me few hours to test and fix few issues. >>>>> First of all I want to give you kudos for your work, Kudos! >>>>> That said, the patch fails on multiple cases. I'll commit that so we can >>>>> continue working on it. >>>>> I'm able to create a basebox but vagrant fails on xenbox. Pl. test it at >>>>> your end also. >>>>> Will try to fix this issue, next week in free time. >>>>> >>>>> Here are some of my reviews and comments: >>>>> >>>>> 0. I moved all the stuff in tools/devcloud/src/ and fixed the README.md >>>>> file for some of the things which failed for me. >>>>> 1. Is there a way we can use the default vagrant release without having >>>>> to use a fork? >>>>> 2. VirtualBox 4.2 was not supported, can you or Chip help fix vagrant? >>>>> >>>>> I did a workaround that worked for me: >>>>> diff --git a/lib/vagrant/driver/virtualbox.rb >>>>> b/lib/vagrant/driver/virtualbox.rb >>>>> index baf462b..5a1dce2 100644 >>>>> --- a/lib/vagrant/driver/virtualbox.rb >>>>> +++ b/lib/vagrant/driver/virtualbox.rb >>>>> @@ -44,7 +44,8 @@ module Vagrant >>>>> @logger.debug("Finding driver for VirtualBox version: #{@version}") >>>>> driver_map = { >>>>> "4.0" => VirtualBox_4_0, >>>>> - "4.1" => VirtualBox_4_1 >>>>> + "4.1" => VirtualBox_4_1, >>>>> + "4.2" => VirtualBox_4_1, >>>>> } >>>>> >>>>> driver_klass = nil >>>>> >>>>> 3. The default basebox has only one NIC, which fails as DevCloud needs to >>>>> have >>>>> two nics; first one should be the host-only one and second one should be >>>>> the >>>>> NAT. >>>> >>>> Rohit Yadav wrote: >>>> Lastly, one more thing. We should move all the stuff that is not >>>> directly related to CloudStack in separate git repos which would make >>>> maintaining them more easy and distribution as well. But, since the code >>>> on devcloud build automation was already within the source code I'll >>>> commit the changes. (upto community to decide on this) >>> >>> Thanks a lot for taking a look at it. I too am having an issue with the >>> xenbox build, it's not able to apt-get some packages. Is this the same >>> problem you were having? >>> >>> 1. As I understand it, the reason we have to use chip's fork of vagrant is >>> outlined here: >>> http://www.chipchilders.com/blog/2012/8/14/automatically-building-devcloud-images-for-apache-cloudstack.html. >>> (We actually use 2 versions of vagrant to get things working properly). >>> >>> 2. I'll talk to Chip about fixing his fork for Virtualbox 4.2 support. >>> >>> 3. The basebox does have only one nic, but the devcloud box has 2 nics. In >>> this case, eth1 is hostonly, and eth0 is NAT. The default NIC in vagrant >>> is eth0 and NAT, I could not find a way to change that, but I'll take >>> another peak. >>> >>> Thanks again. >>> >>> - James >>> >>> >>> - James >>> >>> >>> ----------------------------------------------------------- >>> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: >>> https://reviews.apache.org/r/8399/#review14536 >>> ----------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> >>> On Dec. 8, 2012, 5:31 p.m., James Martin wrote: >>>> >>>> ----------------------------------------------------------- >>>> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: >>>> https://reviews.apache.org/r/8399/ >>>> ----------------------------------------------------------- >>>> >>>> (Updated Dec. 8, 2012, 5:31 p.m.) >>>> >>>> >>>> Review request for cloudstack, Prasanna Santhanam and Rohit Yadav. >>>> >>>> >>>> Description >>>> ------- >>>> >>>> This diff cleans up the devcloud build process. >>>> >>>> Please see tools/devcloud/README.md for more information. >>>> >>>> I also have a fork of cloudstack available with this change: >>>> >>>> https://github.com/jsmartin/incubator-cloudstack/tree/devcloud-cleanup >>>> >>>> >>>> Diffs >>>> ----- >>>> >>>> >>>> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/8399/diff/ >>>> >>>> >>>> Testing >>>> ------- >>>> >>>> Built the veewee basebox and the vagrant xenbox. >>>> Built a cloudstack vagrant box. >>>> Was able to reach cloudstack at http://192.168.56.10:8080/client >>>> >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>> James Martin >>
