Re: [Users] Update from 3.2 to 3.3 (CentOS 6.4)
Hi, I just updated our oVirt 3.2 test setup to 3.3 without problems. One thing seems to be changed. instead of running engine-upgrade you need to run ovirt-setup _Vincent On 09/16/2013 06:41 PM, H. Haven Liu wrote: Thanks for the discussion. But for those of us that are not using gluster, but just good ol' NFS, is updating simply yum update ovirt-*? No, yum update won't upgrade ovirt packages. If you're running on Fedora, you need to update Fedora first, then run engine-upgrade. If you're on EL6, a simple engine-upgrade should work. Ofer, any other gotchas? Can you have someone create a 3.2 to 3.3 upgrade page on the wiki? Thanks Mike On Sep 16, 2013, at 2:54 PM, Mike Burns mbu...@redhat.com wrote: On 09/16/2013 05:26 PM, Joop wrote: Mike Burns wrote: On 09/16/2013 04:30 PM, Joop wrote: H. Haven Liu wrote: Hello, Is there any recommended procedure for updating from 3.2 to 3.3 (namely on a CentOS 6.4 system), or anything one should be careful when doing such update? Be careful when you use glusterfs, not nfs over glusterfs, but read the release-notes. It should have something to say about glusterfs domain not (yet) working on el6. Saw a small discussion on irc just yet and my two cents are that you can't add el6 support to ovirt in release 3.2 and then withdraw it with 3.3 and say well just wait for Centos/Rhel-6.5. We haven't removed any functionality in 3.3. In 3.2, we added support for gluster domains through a POSIXFS interface. In 3.3, we're adding a feature where we support gluster natively. This works in Fedora, but is not available on EL6. The POSIXFS option still exists You're right but what about users who want to use the (much) improved speed of the gluster domain over the POSIXFS interface? They are left out or they should move to Fed19 which I would do but I need to convince a couple of other people as well and they aren't going to agree. I understand the complaint, honestly. And we're working on a solution so that it will work for people on EL6. From the perspective of whether we should release with this limitation or not, I'd point out that by not releasing, we'd be preventing everyone from using any of the new features until we get a solution for this. I'd rather release and make it available for everyone now and say that the Gluster domain for EL6 will come as soon as we can work out the dependency issues. The kernel can come from elrepo so that is not a burden for the ovirt team, qemu/libvirt should be build by the ovirt team and be available from the ovirt repo. At the moment I also see/saw Jboss-7.1.1 qemu/libvirt wouldn't be the first packages to be in the ovirt-repo which are also in the main distributions repos. We're trying to work out a way to do this in a consistent manner going forward. We should have a solution soon, but in the meantime, the other functionality and features should work on both Fedora and EL6. Thanks for the clarification and I'm waiting eagerly for what/when the solution comes out. There have been a few considerations for solving this including rebuilding pure upstream or fedora packages for EL6. That is a risky solution in my mind since there are rather large deltas between Fedora and EL6. We're looking at whether we can have a virt-preview type of repo for EL6 similar to what exists today for Fedora[1]. Thanks Mike [1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Virtualization_Preview_Repository Joop ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users -- Vincent Van der Kussen @vincentvdk ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Re: [Users] Update from 3.2 to 3.3 (CentOS 6.4)
On 09/21/2013 06:16 PM, Vincent Van der Kussen wrote: Hi, I just updated our oVirt 3.2 test setup to 3.3 without problems. One thing seems to be changed. instead of running engine-upgrade you need to run ovirt-setup that's worth either having a symlink for, or updating release notes / various places in wiki mentioning this. _Vincent On 09/16/2013 06:41 PM, H. Haven Liu wrote: Thanks for the discussion. But for those of us that are not using gluster, but just good ol' NFS, is updating simply yum update ovirt-*? No, yum update won't upgrade ovirt packages. If you're running on Fedora, you need to update Fedora first, then run engine-upgrade. If you're on EL6, a simple engine-upgrade should work. Ofer, any other gotchas? Can you have someone create a 3.2 to 3.3 upgrade page on the wiki? Thanks Mike On Sep 16, 2013, at 2:54 PM, Mike Burns mbu...@redhat.com wrote: On 09/16/2013 05:26 PM, Joop wrote: Mike Burns wrote: On 09/16/2013 04:30 PM, Joop wrote: H. Haven Liu wrote: Hello, Is there any recommended procedure for updating from 3.2 to 3.3 (namely on a CentOS 6.4 system), or anything one should be careful when doing such update? Be careful when you use glusterfs, not nfs over glusterfs, but read the release-notes. It should have something to say about glusterfs domain not (yet) working on el6. Saw a small discussion on irc just yet and my two cents are that you can't add el6 support to ovirt in release 3.2 and then withdraw it with 3.3 and say well just wait for Centos/Rhel-6.5. We haven't removed any functionality in 3.3. In 3.2, we added support for gluster domains through a POSIXFS interface. In 3.3, we're adding a feature where we support gluster natively. This works in Fedora, but is not available on EL6. The POSIXFS option still exists You're right but what about users who want to use the (much) improved speed of the gluster domain over the POSIXFS interface? They are left out or they should move to Fed19 which I would do but I need to convince a couple of other people as well and they aren't going to agree. I understand the complaint, honestly. And we're working on a solution so that it will work for people on EL6. From the perspective of whether we should release with this limitation or not, I'd point out that by not releasing, we'd be preventing everyone from using any of the new features until we get a solution for this. I'd rather release and make it available for everyone now and say that the Gluster domain for EL6 will come as soon as we can work out the dependency issues. The kernel can come from elrepo so that is not a burden for the ovirt team, qemu/libvirt should be build by the ovirt team and be available from the ovirt repo. At the moment I also see/saw Jboss-7.1.1 qemu/libvirt wouldn't be the first packages to be in the ovirt-repo which are also in the main distributions repos. We're trying to work out a way to do this in a consistent manner going forward. We should have a solution soon, but in the meantime, the other functionality and features should work on both Fedora and EL6. Thanks for the clarification and I'm waiting eagerly for what/when the solution comes out. There have been a few considerations for solving this including rebuilding pure upstream or fedora packages for EL6. That is a risky solution in my mind since there are rather large deltas between Fedora and EL6. We're looking at whether we can have a virt-preview type of repo for EL6 similar to what exists today for Fedora[1]. Thanks Mike [1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Virtualization_Preview_Repository Joop ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Re: [Users] Update from 3.2 to 3.3 (CentOS 6.4)
On 09/21/2013 06:16 PM, Vincent Van der Kussen wrote: Hi, I just updated our oVirt 3.2 test setup to 3.3 without problems. One thing seems to be changed. instead of running engine-upgrade you need to run ovirt-setup that's worth either having a symlink for, or updating release notes / various places in wiki mentioning this. This is mentioned when running engine-upgrade. _Vincent On 09/16/2013 06:41 PM, H. Haven Liu wrote: Thanks for the discussion. But for those of us that are not using gluster, but just good ol' NFS, is updating simply yum update ovirt-*? No, yum update won't upgrade ovirt packages. If you're running on Fedora, you need to update Fedora first, then run engine-upgrade. If you're on EL6, a simple engine-upgrade should work. Ofer, any other gotchas? Can you have someone create a 3.2 to 3.3 upgrade page on the wiki? Thanks Mike On Sep 16, 2013, at 2:54 PM, Mike Burns mbu...@redhat.com wrote: On 09/16/2013 05:26 PM, Joop wrote: Mike Burns wrote: On 09/16/2013 04:30 PM, Joop wrote: H. Haven Liu wrote: Hello, Is there any recommended procedure for updating from 3.2 to 3.3 (namely on a CentOS 6.4 system), or anything one should be careful when doing such update? Be careful when you use glusterfs, not nfs over glusterfs, but read the release-notes. It should have something to say about glusterfs domain not (yet) working on el6. Saw a small discussion on irc just yet and my two cents are that you can't add el6 support to ovirt in release 3.2 and then withdraw it with 3.3 and say well just wait for Centos/Rhel-6.5. We haven't removed any functionality in 3.3. In 3.2, we added support for gluster domains through a POSIXFS interface. In 3.3, we're adding a feature where we support gluster natively. This works in Fedora, but is not available on EL6. The POSIXFS option still exists You're right but what about users who want to use the (much) improved speed of the gluster domain over the POSIXFS interface? They are left out or they should move to Fed19 which I would do but I need to convince a couple of other people as well and they aren't going to agree. I understand the complaint, honestly. And we're working on a solution so that it will work for people on EL6. From the perspective of whether we should release with this limitation or not, I'd point out that by not releasing, we'd be preventing everyone from using any of the new features until we get a solution for this. I'd rather release and make it available for everyone now and say that the Gluster domain for EL6 will come as soon as we can work out the dependency issues. The kernel can come from elrepo so that is not a burden for the ovirt team, qemu/libvirt should be build by the ovirt team and be available from the ovirt repo. At the moment I also see/saw Jboss-7.1.1 qemu/libvirt wouldn't be the first packages to be in the ovirt-repo which are also in the main distributions repos. We're trying to work out a way to do this in a consistent manner going forward. We should have a solution soon, but in the meantime, the other functionality and features should work on both Fedora and EL6. Thanks for the clarification and I'm waiting eagerly for what/when the solution comes out. There have been a few considerations for solving this including rebuilding pure upstream or fedora packages for EL6. That is a risky solution in my mind since there are rather large deltas between Fedora and EL6. We're looking at whether we can have a virt-preview type of repo for EL6 similar to what exists today for Fedora[1]. Thanks Mike [1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Virtualization_Preview_Repository Joop ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users -- Vincent Van der Kussen @vincentvdk ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Re: [Users] Ubuntu/Debian ovirt-guest-agent
on 2013/09/19 00:05, René Koch (ovido) wrote: On Wed, 2013-09-18 at 12:36 +0800, Zhou Zheng Sheng wrote: Hi René, You are correct. I add python-apt as a recommend dependency package and upload the package again for Ubuntu and Debian. I didn't notice the problem because I have other packages in my test machine which depend on python-apt. Thanks. No problem. Btw, are you (or anyone else) working on getting the guest agent into official Debian/Ubuntu repositories? Your packages are working really well, so it should be not to hard to get them into official repos... Sure. I'll try submit to submit request to Debian and Ubuntu maintainers. Thanks for the testing. -- Thanks and best regards! Zhou Zheng Sheng / 周征晟 E-mail: zhshz...@linux.vnet.ibm.com Telephone: 86-10-82454397 ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
