----- Original Message -----
> From: "Steven Dake (stdake)" <std...@cisco.com>
> To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
> <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
>
> Steve,
>
> Comments inline
>
> On 2/3/16, 3:08 PM, "Steve Gordon" <sgor...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> >----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "Hongbin Lu" <hongbin...@huawei.com>
> >> To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
> >><openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
> >>
> >> I would vote for a quick fix + a blueprint.
> >>
> >> BTW, I think it is a general consensus that we should move away from
> >>Atomic
> >> for various reasons (painful image building, lack of document, hard to
> >>use,
> >> etc.). We are working on fixing the CoreOS templates which could replace
> >> Atomic in the future.
> >>
> >> Best regards,
> >> Hongbin
> >
> >Hi Hongbin,
> >
> >I had heard this previously in Tokyo and again when I was asking around
> >about the image support on IRC last week, is there a list of the exact
> >issues with image building etc. with regards to Atomic? When I was
> >following up on this it seemed like the main issue is that the docs in
> >the magnum repo are quite out of date (versus the upstream fedora atomic
> >docs) both with regards to the content of the image and the process used
> >to (re)build it - there didn't seem to be anything quantifiable that's
> >wrong with the current Atomic images but perhaps I was asking the wrong
> >folks. I was able to rebuild fairly trivially using the Fedora built
> >artefacts [1][2].
>
> Steve,
>
> I hope you can forgive my directness and lack of diplomacy in this
> message. :)
>
> At least when I was heavily involved with Magnum, building atomic images
> resulted in a situation in which the binaries built did not work properly.
> I begged on the irc channels for help and begged on the mailing list for
> help for _ months _ on end and nobody listened. It is almost as if nobody
> is actually working on Atomic. If there are people, they do not maintain
> any kind of support footprint upstream to make Atomic a viable platform
> for Magnum.
Hi Steve,
No worries about directness, it's actually what I am trying to elicit so I can
understand and hopefully help address the issues. I did come across a couple of
mailing list posts from you mainly asking about newer k8s/etcd/flannel versions
and also etcdctl inclusion (there was a workaround posted at the time but I
note it's now in the image) [1][2]. These threads are actually what prompted me
to ask "what else?" to try and determine if Magnum had other needs here, e.g.
the rpm-ostree issue you refer to below is the type of hint I'm after to try
and ensure everything is tracked somewhere.
> I taught Tango how to build the images, who wrote the instructions down in
> the Magnum documentation. That documentation ends up producing images
> that randomly don't always work. The binaries return some weird system
> call error, ebadlink I think but not sure. Tango may remember.
I was playing around with this earlier in the week and had some more success
via a slightly different path, I'm in the process of attempting to re-produce
on a clean system to ensure that (a) I didn't skip anything in the notes I took
and (b) weed out any other setup that was peculiar to my system before I
propose something against the docs.
> Perhaps the rpm-ostree defect has been resolved now. I have to be clear
> that I was told "please wait 6 months for us to fix the build system and
> bugs" while Atomic was our only distro implemented. It was very
> maddening. I was so frustrated with Atomic, at the start of Mitaka I was
> going to propose deprecating Atomic because of a complete lack of upstream
> responsiveness. I decided to let other folks make the call about what
> they wanted to do with Atomic since I was myself unresponsive with the
> Magnum upstream because of my full-time Kolla commitment.
>
> I am pretty sure a bug was filed about this issue in the Red Hat bugzilla,
> but I can't find it.
Thanks, the hint that it regarded rpm-ostree was enough for me to find this:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1177989
Does that seem like the right issue? That in turn led me to this bug which
appears fixed in F21, but I need to follow up to work out what if anything
happened w.r.t. the second half of Colin's comment in the above bug (or whether
it is still relevant):
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1178208
Somewhat tangentially I was also wondering if there are specific version
combinations of components (be they images, or the versions of specific
components they contain) that are currently recommended/preferred for a given
release. Obviously there is the custom image that is currently provided but I
am thinking more for folks trying to roll their own etc. I didn't spot anything
while poking around in the docs as yet but I may be looking in the wrong
places. What I am thinking of is something like this but for the Magnum context:
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/LibvirtDistroSupportMatrix
Thanks,
Steve
[1]
https://lists.projectatomic.io/projectatomic-archives/atomic-devel/2015-April/msg00042.html
[2] https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/cloud/2015-January/004811.html
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
