If you are using bubble, here are a few more 'tweaks'. The 'bubble-blueprint' is missing the following, so you will need to do the following after you run it:
$ systemctl stop firewalld $ systemctl disable firewalld Also, if you are using a static IP, you will have to manually add the following to your /etc/resolv.conf file. search cloud.lan nameserver 192.168.22.1 After you add it, you will have to do the following for everything to get picked up. $ systemctl restart supervisord Just ask if you have problems with bubble, a few of use are using it and have worked through most of the issues. :) *Will STEVENS* Lead Developer *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6 w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_ On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 4:34 PM, Daan Hoogland <daan.hoogl...@gmail.com> wrote: > For those interested: Fred and I have some adjustments for Fedora and as > Cloudstack we need to remain at java 1.7 for now while the SBP guys are > ahead of us at 1.8. > > On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 10:30 PM, Remi Bergsma <rberg...@schubergphilis.com > > > wrote: > > > Great to see more and more people use the bubbles! > > > > Setting up: > > https://github.com/MissionCriticalCloud/bubble-blueprint > > > > Using: > > https://github.com/MissionCriticalCloud/bubble-toolkit > > > > Happy testing :-) > > > > Regards, Remi > > > > > On 07 Apr 2016, at 19:56, Will Stevens <wstev...@cloudops.com> wrote: > > > > > > If you want me to verify things in your env, you can send me a tmate > > > <https://tmate.io/> and I can have a look. > > > > > > *Will STEVENS* > > > Lead Developer > > > > > > *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts > > > 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6 > > > w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_ > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 1:54 PM, Daan Hoogland <daan.hoogl...@gmail.com > > > > > wrote: > > > > > >> yes, makes perfect sense. I skipped 1326 for now, I just tried to > build > > >> 1436 it fails in the rpm build fase. I am now going to try that ui > > thing to > > >> build confidence in my test environment. > > >> > > >> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 7:49 PM, Rafael Weingärtner < > > >> rafaelweingart...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> > > >>> Sure it makes. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 2:47 PM, Will Stevens <wstev...@cloudops.com> > > >>> wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> Yes, if the PR is ONLY a test and does not touch any other code then > > we > > >>> can > > >>>> only run that test. I agree with you. > > >>>> > > >>>> If any code is changed outside the test, I always run the full > suite. > > >>> Make > > >>>> sense? > > >>>> > > >>>> *Will STEVENS* > > >>>> Lead Developer > > >>>> > > >>>> *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts > > >>>> 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6 > > >>>> w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_ > > >>>> > > >>>> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 1:41 PM, Daan Hoogland < > > daan.hoogl...@gmail.com > > >>> > > >>>> wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>>> running a new test in an environment should pass but should not > > >> require > > >>>> all > > >>>>> other test being re-validated. SO what is the point of running all > > >>>> others? > > >>>>> I am not saying we shouldn't regularly run all tests but in this > case > > >>> it > > >>>>> adds no value AFAICT. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 7:35 PM, Will Stevens < > wstev...@cloudops.com> > > >>>>> wrote: > > >>>>> > > >>>>>> Yes, I want to run tests against the tests. I have found issues > in > > >>>> some > > >>>>> of > > >>>>>> the tests not working as expected, so I add the test to the run > and > > >>> run > > >>>>>> them. I think it is worth it because then we know the test is > > >> valid > > >>>>>> later. I would rather have the author fix the test now if there > > >> are > > >>>>>> problems than having to work through it later. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> I am going to be doing a big push on getting testing cleaned up, > so > > >>>> when > > >>>>> I > > >>>>>> start going through all the tests and validating them, I want to > > >>> reduce > > >>>>> the > > >>>>>> amount of work I have to do, so validating the tests at source > > >> makes > > >>>>> sense. > > >>>>>> :) > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> *Will STEVENS* > > >>>>>> Lead Developer > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts > > >>>>>> 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6 > > >>>>>> w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_ > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 1:30 PM, Daan Hoogland < > > >>> daan.hoogl...@gmail.com > > >>>>> > > >>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>> 1326 is just a test. it does not touch production code. Do we run > > >>>>>>> regression tests against such PRs. seems a waste to me. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 7:27 PM, Daan Hoogland < > > >>>> daan.hoogl...@gmail.com > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 7:26 PM, Daan Hoogland < > > >>>>> daan.hoogl...@gmail.com > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> 1326 - master (*pending CI) > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> starting > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>> Daan > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>> Daan > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> -- > > >>>>> Daan > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> -- > > >>> Rafael Weingärtner > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> -- > > >> Daan > > >> > > > > > > -- > Daan >
