Anders Ingemann <[email protected]> writes: > On 24 April 2015 at 17:28, Olivier Berger < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Am I right in saying that packer brings in the main benefit of not >> setting a fixed size for the disks, which is problematic with >> bootstrap-vz (as Jan experienced) ? >> > > Could you elaborate on that? I'd be very interested in how to do that for > bootstrap-vz if it is possible. > > Anders
Hmmm... damn it. I can't remember the exact details, sorry. I experienced a partition/disk limit of some kind when I tried to create a base box for FusionForge with bootstrap-vz, but I hit some limit. I then changed for a packer approach, which was more flexible... but I forgot the exact details unfortunately (twins born in between and lack of sleep doesn't help me these days ;). I made a note for myself at https://fusionforge.org/plugins/mediawiki/wiki/fusionforge/index.php/Virtual_machine_development_environment#Modify_the_VM but can't remember now : shame. Obviously, if you set a maximum size for a base box disk geometry, and you later need more volume for the Vagrant image built over this base box, you're gonna get stuck sooner or later... I don't remember the details, but the volume geometry or volume format somehow seemed more flexible with packer. Maybe some different layout for storage, or storage file type choices ? :-/ If someone can confirm or investigate ? Sorry again for the lack of details :-( Best regards, -- Olivier BERGER http://www-public.telecom-sudparis.eu/~berger_o/ - OpenPGP-Id: 2048R/5819D7E8 Ingenieur Recherche - Dept INF Institut Mines-Telecom, Telecom SudParis, Evry (France) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: https://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
