On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 04:10:01PM +0100, Martin Pitt wrote: > Hello Timo, > > Timo Aaltonen [2018-02-15 16:50 +0200]: > > On 14.02.2018 22:03, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > I am on bionic and managed to build bionic container for testing using: > > > > > > $ autopkgtest-build-lxd ubuntu-daily:bionic/amd64 > > > > > > Note this uses Ubuntu Foundations provided container as the base, > > > rather than the third-party image that you are using from "images" > > > remote. > > > > > > Why are you using images: remote? > > > > Because that's what the manpage suggests :) > > Right, and quite deliberately. At least back in "my days", the ubuntu: and > ubuntu-daily: images had a lot of fat in them which made them both > unnecessarily slow (extra download time, requires more RAM/disk, etc.) and > also > undesirable for test correctness, as having all of the unnecessary bits > preinstalled easily hides missing dependencies. > > The latter can be alleviated by purging stuff of course, and that's what > happens for the cloud VM images in OpenStack: > > > https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/autopkgtest/autopkgtest.git/tree/setup-commands/setup-testbed#n242 > > But this takes even more time, and so far just hasn't been necessary as the > images: ones were just right - they contain exactly what a generic container > image is supposed to contain and are pleasantly small and fast. > > > > Is the failure reproducible with ubuntu-daily:bionic? > > > > > > If you can build images with ubuntu-daily:bionic, then you need to > > > contact and file an issue with images: remote provider. > > > > ubuntu-daily: works, images: fails for artful and bionic while xenial > > works, and the image server is: > > > > https://images.linuxcontainers.org/ > > These are being advertised and used a lot, so maybe Stephane's LXD team can > help with fixing these? Them having no network at all sounds like a grave bug > which should be fixed either way. > > That said, it could of course be that the setup script just needs some > adjustments for the netplan changes: > https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/autopkgtest/autopkgtest.git/tree/setup-commands/setup-testbed > As this doesn't know about netplan at all, just ifupdown. > > Martin
stgraber@castiana:~$ lxc launch images:ubuntu/bionic/amd64 bionic Creating bionic Starting bionic stgraber@castiana:~$ lxc launch images:ubuntu/artful/amd64 artful Creating artful Starting artful stgraber@castiana:~$ lxc list +-------------+---------+--------------------------------+----------------------------------------------+------------+-----------+ | NAME | STATE | IPV4 | IPV6 | TYPE | SNAPSHOTS | +-------------+---------+--------------------------------+----------------------------------------------+------------+-----------+ | artful | RUNNING | 10.204.119.187 (eth0) | 2001:470:b368:4242:216:3eff:fe27:799b (eth0) | PERSISTENT | 0 | +-------------+---------+--------------------------------+----------------------------------------------+------------+-----------+ | bionic | RUNNING | 10.204.119.248 (eth0) | 2001:470:b368:4242:216:3eff:fe8c:7741 (eth0) | PERSISTENT | 0 | +-------------+---------+--------------------------------+----------------------------------------------+------------+-----------+ And confirmed that networking inside both of them works fine here. I wonder if it's a netplan vs ifupdown thing hitting autopkgtest in this case? -- Stéphane Graber Ubuntu developer http://www.ubuntu.com
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- ubuntu-devel mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
