Couple of minor corrections and details... Where ever I referred to release 1.1.0, I meant 1.1.2 in several places below.
Also... Rev 1.1.1 is currently in Fedora Rawhide but 1.0.7 is the latest in Fedora 21 updates. Regards, Mike On Mon, 2015-04-13 at 12:49 -0400, Michael H. Warfield wrote: > On Sun, 2015-04-12 at 19:15 -0300, Martin Cigorraga wrote: > > Hi all, > > > Host OS: Fedora 21 up-to-date, kernel 3.19.3 > > > Yesterday I tried to create a Fedora container but constantly had the > > following errors; while ultimately I could manage to end up with a > > working system after running an update once the container was created, > > I don't know how much crippled it ended being... > > > Please check the following errors: > > # lxc-create -n F21 -t fedora -B btrfs > > Host CPE ID from /etc/os-release: cpe:/o:fedoraproject:fedora:21 > > Checking cache download in /var/cache/lxc/fedora/x86_64/21/rootfs ... > > Downloading fedora minimal ... > > Fetching rpm name from > > http://www.las.ic.unicamp.br/pub/fedora/linux/releases/21/Everything/x86_64/os//Packages/f... > > % Total % Received % Xferd Average Speed Time Time Time > > Current > > Dload Upload Total Spent Left > > Speed > > 100 413 100 413 0 0 440 0 --:--:-- --:--:-- --:--:-- > > 440 > > 100 837 100 837 0 0 749 0 0:00:01 0:00:01 --:--:-- > > 749 > > Failed to identify fedora release rpm. > > Fetching rpm name from > > http://fedora.c3sl.ufpr.br/linux/releases/21/Everything/x86_64/os//Packages/f... > > % Total % Received % Xferd Average Speed Time Time Time > > Current > > Dload Upload Total Spent Left > > Speed > > 100 286 100 286 0 0 252 0 0:00:01 0:00:01 --:--:-- > > 252 > > 0 0 0 240k 0 0 87074 0 --:--:-- 0:00:02 --:--:-- > > 186k > > Fetching fedora release rpm from > > http://fedora.c3sl.ufpr.br/linux/releases/21/Everything/x86_64/os//Packages/f/fedora-release-21-2.noarch.rpm...... > > % Total % Received % Xferd Average Speed Time Time Time > > Current > > Dload Upload Total Spent Left > > Speed > > 100 21860 100 21860 0 0 15132 0 0:00:01 0:00:01 --:--:-- > > 15138 > > Bootstrap Environment testing... > > The "Failed to identify fedora release rpm above is normal, if that's > what you are complaining about. At least normal for the template when > it encounters a broken repository. I checked the www.las.ic.unicam.br > repository and their "Packages/f" directory is empty. That's why I > coded the logic in there to do a directory listing first and look for > the release file (which may have additional revisions). The template > could not identify a release file in there so it moved onto a different > repository where is was able to find the fedora-release rpm. It did > what it was suppose to do. I guess the failure message could be clearer > on that point. > > > OS fedora is whitelisted. Installation Bootstrap Environment not required. > > > warning: > > /var/cache/lxc/fedora/x86_64/21/partial/fedora-release-21-2.noarch.rpm: > > Header V3 RSA/SHA256 Signature, key ID 95a43f54: NOKEY > > Preparing... ################################# > > [100%] > > Updating / installing... > > 1:fedora-release-21-2 ################################# > > [100%] > > sed: can't read > > //var/cache/lxc/fedora/x86_64/21/partial/etc/yum.repos.d/*: No such > > file or directory > > Ok... I didn't recognize the above error with sed but I found it. It's > attempting to adjust the basearch parameters in the yum repo files (used > primarily to adjust for an i386 container on an x86_64 host). That's > indicating that the repo files have not been downloaded for F21. > > This is in the most recent template (taken from 1.1.0): > -- > # F21 and newer need fedora-repos in addition to fedora-release... > # Note that fedora-release and fedora-system have a mutual dependency. > # So installing the reops package after the release package we can > # spare one --nodeps. > if [ "$release" -ge "21" ]; then > ${BOOTSTRAP_CHROOT}rpm --root ${BOOTSTRAP_INSTALL_ROOT} -ivh > ${BOOTSTRAP_INSTALL_ROOT}/${REPOS_RPM} > fi > -- > > There is more in there for actually downloading that REPOS_RPM as well. > > What version of lxc are you running? I'm currently running 1.1.0 rpms > built from the releases on an F21 host without seeing any of these > errors. You also seem to be missing a couple of the "repo" downloads > that are present in the 1.1.0 template. > > Latest rev for lxc on stock F21 is 1.0.7. I just checked that template > and the above code is not present, which explains the sed error, since > the template files are not then present. F21 and above also have to > install the fedora-repos rpm. That's where your problem is. It looks > like 1.0.7 is the latest release in the 1.0.x line and needs the F21 > repo fix applied to template in that branch. My recommendation would be > to upgrade to 1.1.0 > > > Loaded plugins: etckeeper, fastestmirror, keys, langpacks, list-data, > > priorities, ps, remove-with-leaves, rpm-warm-cache, show-leaves, > > tmprepo, upgrade-helper > > Determining fastest mirrors... > > > / > > > From the errors shown above, I want to add that the first time the > > container is created it *always* has exactly the same problems: > > 1. Problems with fedora-release; > > Which appears to be a problem with one of the F21 repositories. There > may be some additional problem in the retry logic for that broken repo > but I'm not seeing it. Seems to be working correctly, although you're > not getting the fedora-repos rpms. > > > 2. Mispell path: > > //var/cache/lxc/fedora/x86_64/21/partial/etc/yum.repos.d/* (though > > there's no typo in the template file itself). > > This appears to be related to the fedora-release / fedora-repos split in > F21 and is fixed in the 1.1.0 branch and master. Not at all sure what > you meant by "mispell path" but it's the correct path (just with a > superfluous duplicate leading '/'). > > > Let me know if I can be of further assistance to help squash down these > > bugs. > > I don't know that there are any plans for a 1.0.8 release or how fast > that would be picked up by Fedora. > > You might want to file a bugzilla report with Fedora against Fedora 21. > I don't know that there are any plans for a 1.0.8 release or how fast > that would be picked up by Fedora. Might be easier to get them to pick > up the 1.1.0 release. I'll also ping the maintainer and see what he > wants to do. > > > -MartÃn > > Regards, > Mike -- Michael H. Warfield (AI4NB) | (770) 978-7061 | [email protected] /\/\|=mhw=|\/\/ | (678) 463-0932 | http://www.wittsend.com/mhw/ NIC whois: MHW9 | An optimist believes we live in the best of all PGP Key: 0x674627FF | possible worlds. A pessimist is sure of it!
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ lxc-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxcontainers.org/listinfo/lxc-users
