Hi Emmanuel!

On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 2:37 AM, Emmanuel Kasper <[email protected]> wrote:

> >> Thanks for maintaining the
> https://atlas.hashicorp.com/debian/boxes/jessie64
> >> Vagrant box.
> >>
> >> TL;DR: Is there any interest in having this project publish an image
> that
> >> does support the vboxsf filesystem? I would be hugely in favor of that.
> I
> >> can possibly contribute work toward generating a second image called
> (e.g.)
> >> https://atlas.hashicorp.com/debian/boxes/jessie64-contrib-vboxsf if
> that's
> >> helpful to separate it from the official one, since I appreciate the
> goal
> >> of shipping an image that contains 100% packages from "Debian main".
> >
> > FWIW, since Virtualbox itself is already not in main, I don't see much
> > of a point in distributing a "main-only" vagrant box where the main
> > feature of vagrant, which is sharing your source directory with the
> > guest VM, does not work out of the box.
> >
> > This whole mess is why I decided to use and maintain vagrant-lxc and the
> > debian boxes for the 'lxc' provider; everything just works without
> > anything that is not in main.
>
> Hi Asheesh & Antonio
> First thanks for the interest on these boxes.
>
> After some second thought, I agreee on that.
> I will re enable the vboxfs in the Vagrant Box and move that to a
> "contrib" namespace.
>

Yay! Thanks so much.

BTW, one other note:

The VirtualBox shared files kernel module appears to be fully free
software. It seems to be an accident of history that the kernel modules
live in the same source package as the VirtualBox BIOS; see my mail here:
https://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-virtualbox-devel/2015-December/005610.html

But anyway, Emannuel, I'm super excited. From the Sandstorm perspective, we
just forced a transition for our app packagers to use this Vagrant box
repository -- https://atlas.hashicorp.com/sandstorm/boxes/debian-jessie64
-- but what we will do going forward is:

- Manually test your updates to the contrib-enabled Debian vagrant box
against the Sandstorm app packaging tool (vagrant-spk), and then

- Once it passes the tests, then copy your vagrant box bit-for-bit to our
atlas.hashicorp.com account.

So then there's no duplication of work here; we'd be using a separate
atlas.hashicorp.com account to indicate that we've checked the
(quasi-)official Debian base box against our use-case, just as a way to
signal QA.

In case you're curious, this is the note I sent to the sandstorm-dev list
about the migration:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/sandstorm-dev/KgGuIja2l_I


> I still find it would be interesting to have official vagrant base
> boxes, generated from the Debian infrastructure, but LXC should be used
> for that.
>
> @asheesh: My idea would be to implement this in the next two weeks, as I
> am going on Holidays now. BTW sandstorm is an interesting project !
>

Thanks! Glad you find it interesting! : D


>
> If people want to have a main-only Virtualbox image, I am looking for
> help to maintain these !


nod. I probably won't volunteer to maintain a VirtualBox Vagrant box
without vboxsf but if we figure out a way to split the virtualbox source
package up so that the contrib components can live in a separate source
package, then I could possibly help work on that virtualbox packaging
change.

-- Asheesh.

Reply via email to