cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Boris Schrijver <bo...@pcextreme.nl>
Subject RE: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0
Date Fri, 06 Nov 2015 13:55:50 GMT
Same tomcat6 issue?

-- 

Met vriendelijke groet / Kind regards,

Boris Schrijver

PCextreme B.V.

http://www.pcextreme.nl/contact
Tel direct: +31 6 33784542

> On November 6, 2015 at 2:49 PM Paul Angus <paul.angus@shapeblue.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> Sorry guys.  CentOS 7 install is NOT fixed in 4.6.0-RC20151104T1522.
> 
> 
> Sorry had to fly out to client in Kenya, so not been able to work on it
> recently.
> 
> -1
> 
> [root@CentOS7ACSTest ~]# cloudstack-setup-management
> Starting to configure CloudStack Management Server:
> Configure Firewall ...        [OK]
> Configure CloudStack Management Server ...[Failed]
> Cannot find /etc/cloudstack/management/server-nonssl.xml or
> /etc/cloudstack/management/tomcat6-nonssl.conf, https enables failed
> Try to restore your system:
> Restore Firewall ...          [OK]
> Restore CloudStack Management Server ...[OK]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Paul Angus
> VP Technology/Cloud Architect
> S: +44 20 3603 0540 | M: +447711418784 | T: CloudyAngus
> paul.angus@shapeblue.com
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Remi Bergsma [mailto:RBergsma@schubergphilis.com]
> Sent: 06 November 2015 13:33
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0
> 
> Hi Raja,
> 
> Thanks for the report. Most of these seem test-case related. For any issue you
> doubt this, can you please verify them manually?
> 
> If it doesn’t work, please file a Jira issue (with details and stept) and set
> it to critical. It will then show up on the list of issues and we can discuss
> how to proceed.
> 
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12332940 (requires login)
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Remi
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 06/11/15 12:07, "Raja Pullela" <raja.pullela@citrix.com> wrote:
> 
> >Here is the BVT report on the RC
> >KVM Basic – 98.6% , one test failed//test case issue KVM Adv – 96.3%,
> >four tests failed //couple due to VM deployment and couple due to test
> >case issue XS Basic – 97.2%, two tests failed//test case issues XS Adv
> >– 93.5%, seven tests failed //4 due to VM deployment and 3 due to test
> >case issues HyperV – 93.3%, seven tests failed Simulator – need to run
> >them… will report later today/tomorrow.
> >
> >
> >Failed test cases:
> >·
> >        integration.smoke.test_vpc_vpn.TestVpcRemoteAccessVpn.test_vpc_remote_access_vpn
> >//failed due to VM deployment
> >·
> >        integration.smoke.test_vpc_vpn.TestVpcSite2SiteVpn.test_vpc_site2site_vpn
> >//failed due to VM deployment
> >·
> >        integration.smoke.test_internal_lb.TestInternalLb.test02_internallb_haproxy_stats_on_all_interfaces
> >//failed due to VM deployment
> >·
> >        integration.smoke.test_internal_lb.TestInternalLb.test_01_internallb_roundrobin_1VPC_3VM_HTTP_port80
> >//failed due to VM deployment
> >·
> >        integration.smoke.test_over_provisioning.TestUpdateOverProvision.test_UpdateStorageOverProvisioningFactor
> >//test case issue
> >·
> >        integration.smoke.test_vm_snapshots.TestSnapshots.test_01_test_vm_volume_snapshot
> >//test case issue
> >·         integration.smoke.test_iso.TestISO.test_07_list_default_iso //test
> >case issue
> ><nose.suite.ContextSuite context=TestNiciraContoller>:setup  //test
> >case issue
> >
> >From: Raja Pullela [mailto:raja.pullela@citrix.com]
> >Sent: Friday, November 6, 2015 4:30 PM
> >To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> >Subject: RE: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0
> >
> >
> >Here is the BVT report on the RC -
> >
> >[cid:image001.png@01D118B0.21037340]
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Wilder Rodrigues [mailto:WRodrigues@schubergphilis.com]
> >Sent: Friday, November 6, 2015 4:19 PM
> >To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org<mailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org>
> >Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0
> >
> >
> >
> >Thanks again, Lucian!
> >
> >
> >
> >I’m already working on 9015 and testing few things, hope to get it fixed
> >soon, but not for 4.6.0.
> >
> >
> >
> >If we kan keep the good work in terms of writing/executing tests - which will
> >help keeping Master stable - and also avoid merges that don’t follow the
> >rule(*), we can have a 4.6.1/4.7.0 (new features) within two month from now.
> >
> >
> >
> >So, let us all keep the great work concerning tests/quality/stability.
> >
> >
> >
> >Cheers,
> >
> >Wilder
> >
> >
> >
> >* 2 LGTMs + tests (written/executed)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >> On 06 Nov 2015, at 10:49, Nux! <nux@li.nux.ro<mailto:nux@li.nux.ro>>
wrote:
> >
> >>
> >
> >> Well, IMHO the 2 issues are not big problems:
> >
> >>
> >
> >> 9015 - it sounds somewhat serious, I'll try to test these days what
> >
> >> happens if one of the VRs crashes, that's when we'd need redundancy
> >> in
> >
> >> a more "real" scenario, if we could get this fixed before release
> >> it'd
> >
> >> be ideal, Remi should know more re correct procedure here
> >
> >>
> >
> >> 9035 - sounds like a non-issue to me, if I want to reset the password  and
> >> the backup router does what it's told, then I don't care it doesn't have
> >> the old passwords from the other router cached. This could impact instance
> >> deployments or passwd resets right in the time BACKUP becomes MASTER. How
> >> long is this generally?
> >
> >>
> >
> >> Lucian
> >
> >>
> >
> >> --
> >
> >> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
> >
> >>
> >
> >> Nux!
> >
> >> www.nux.ro<http://www.nux.ro>
> >
> >>
> >
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >
> >>> From: "Wilder Rodrigues"
> >>> <WRodrigues@schubergphilis.com<mailto:WRodrigues@schubergphilis.com>
> >>> >
> >
> >>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org<mailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org>
> >
> >>> Sent: Friday, 6 November, 2015 09:29:56
> >
> >>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0
> >
> >>
> >
> >>> Thanks for the clear message, Lucian. I really appreciated that. :)
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> It’s about the Redundant VPC, not the single one - which is working
> >
> >>> pretty fine, btw!
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> Open issues are:
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> * https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9015
> >
> >>> * https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9035
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> And I have to write tests to cover Private Gateway and S2S VPN for
> >
> >>> Redundant VPC.
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> All the rest working fine, as you have seen in my report.
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> Cheers,
> >
> >>> Wilder
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> On 06 Nov 2015, at 10:19, Nux!
> >>> <nux@li.nux.ro<mailto:nux@li.nux.ro<mailto:nux@li.nux.ro%3cmailto:nux@li.nux.ro>>>
> >>> wrote:
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> Well, in my non-coder opinion, we should not deliver broken
> >>> software,
> >
> >>> however we saw in the past fixing it all delayed release considerably.
> >
> >>> Now, how broken is that VPC? :)
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> --
> >
> >>> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> Nux!
> >
> >>> www.nux.ro<http://www.nux.ro<http://www.nux.ro%3chttp:/www.nux.ro>>
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> ----- Original Message -----
> >
> >>> From: "Wilder Rodrigues"
> >>> <WRodrigues@schubergphilis.com<mailto:WRodrigues@schubergphilis.com>
> >>> >
> >
> >>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org<mailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org>
> >
> >>> Sent: Friday, 6 November, 2015 08:57:56
> >
> >>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> I forgot to mention that for the failed rVPC test I followed the
> >>> same
> >
> >>> steps manually and it worked as expected.
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> In addition, I would like to hear from the community what should we
> >
> >>> do in terms of minor/major bugs in new features (like the rVPC).
> >>> Will
> >
> >>> those be fix and added to a 4.6.1 or should it still be part of 4.6.0?
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> Cheers,
> >
> >>> Wilder
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> On 06 Nov 2015, at 09:17, Wilder Rodrigues
> >
> >>> <WRodrigues@schubergphilis.com<mailto:WRodrigues@schubergphilis.com<mailto:WRodrigues@schubergphilis.com%3cmailto:WRodrigues@schubergphilis.com>>>
> >>> wrote:
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> Hi all,
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> My considerations after the tests agains XenServer 6.2:
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> We got 4 failures whilst testing against Xen62:
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> * test_vpc_redundant.py on line 522
> >
> >>> - AssertionError: No Master or too many master routers found 0
> >
> >>> * test_internal_lb.py lines 712 and 576, when trying to deploy a
> >
> >>> virtual machine
> >
> >>> - Unable to create a deployment for VM[User|i-36-89-VM]
> >
> >>> - Unable to create a deployment for VM[User|i-36-91-VM]
> >
> >>> * test_vpc_vpn.py line 604 for the same reason as above
> >
> >>> - Unable to create a deployment for VM[User|i-37-95-VM]
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> There are bugs in the test_vpc_vpn.py VPN test: in case of failures,
> >
> >>> when we reach either line 604 or 624, it will try to assert the
> >>> state
> >
> >>> of the variable vm1/vm2, but is has not been assigned yet, which
> >
> >>> makes us face an Unbound
> >
> >>> Error:
> >
> >>> - UnboundLocalError: local variable 'vm1' referenced before
> >
> >>> assignment
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> Looking at the code I noticed that the same will happen for vm2, in
> >
> >>> case vm1 deployment passes but vm1 doesn’t.
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> Concerning the LB and VPN tests, those failed due to a wrong
> >
> >>> template. Those tests should be executed against KVM only as they
> >
> >>> have a configuration which depends on KVM hypervisors
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> ```
> >
> >>>         "default_hypervisor": "kvm",
> >
> >>>         "compute_offering": {
> >
> >>>             "name": "Tiny Instance",
> >
> >>>             "displaytext": "Tiny Instance",
> >
> >>>             "cpunumber": 1,
> >
> >>>             "cpuspeed": 100,
> >
> >>>             "memory": 128,
> >
> >>>         }
> >
> >>> ```
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> But I will change that.
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> Concerning the redundant VPC test that failed, it was due an absence
> >
> >>> of a master router. For some reason, after the
> >
> >>> self.delete_nat_rules() was called, the router switched from Master
> >
> >>> to Backup, which caused the error. I will investigate.
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> There was also a problem reported by Boris concerning the DEB
> >
> >>> packages, which he already has a PR for ==>
> >
> >>> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1040. This is package
> >
> >>> related, thus I don’t see it as a blocker for the release, hence my
> >
> >>> +1.
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> ::: Full Report :::
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> :: Environment 1 ::
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> * Hardware required: TRUE
> >
> >>> * Management Server + MySQL on CentOS 7.1
> >
> >>> * Two XenServer 6.2 hosts
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> :: Tests Suites Executed ::
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> nosetests --with-marvin
> >
> >>> --marvin-config=/data/shared/marvin/mct-zone1-xen1-ISOLATED.cfg -s
> >>> -a
> >
> >>> tags=advanced,required_hardware=true component/test_vpc_redundant.py
> >
> >>> component/test_routers_iptables_default_policy.py
> >
> >>> component/test_routers_network_ops.py
> >
> >>> component/test_vpc_router_nics.py component/test_password_server.py
> >
> >>> component/test_router_dhcphosts.py
> >
> >>> smoke/test_loadbalance.py smoke/test_internal_lb.py
> >
> >>> smoke/test_ssvm.py smoke/test_vpc_vpn.py smoke/test_network.py
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> :: Environment 2 ::
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> * Hardware required: FALSE
> >
> >>> * Management Server + MySQL on CentOS 7.1
> >
> >>> * Two XenServer 6.2 hosts
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> :: Tests Suites Executed ::
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> nosetests --with-marvin
> >
> >>> --marvin-config=/data/shared/marvin/mct-zone1-xen1-ISOLATED.cfg -s
> >>> -a
> >
> >>> tags=advanced,required_hardware=false smoke/test_routers.py
> >
> >>> smoke/test_reset_vm_on_reboot.py smoke/test_vm_life_cycle.py
> >
> >>> component/test_vpc_routers.py smoke/test_service_offerings.py
> >
> >>> component/test_vpc_offerings.py smoke/test_network_acl.py
> >
> >>> smoke/test_privategw_acl.py smoke/test_network.py
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> :: Summary ::
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> * Tests executes: 75
> >
> >>> * Successfull tests: 72
> >
> >>> * Skipped tests: 6(*)
> >
> >>> * Failed tests: 5(**)
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> (*) Tests were skipped because I had 2 hosts and the current logic
> >>> in
> >
> >>> the tests does not cope with that: it lists the hosts and takes the
> >
> >>> one in index zero
> >
> >>> - host = hosts[0]
> >
> >>> (**) Failures and Exceptions being taken into counted
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> :: Test results for Environment 1 ::
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> Create a redundant VPC with two networks with two VMs in each
> >>> network
> >
> >>> ... ===
> >
> >>> TestName: test_01_create_redundant_VPC_2tiers_4VMs_4IPs_4PF_ACL | Status
:
> >
> >>> FAILED ===
> >
> >>> FAIL
> >
> >>> Create a redundant VPC with two networks with two VMs in each
> >>> network
> >
> >>> and check default routes ... SKIP: Marvin configuration has no host
> >
> >>> credentials to check router services Test iptables default
> >
> >>> INPUT/FORWARD policy on RouterVM ... === TestName:
> >
> >>> test_02_routervm_iptables_policies | Status : SUCCESS === ok Test
> >
> >>> iptables default INPUT/FORWARD policies on VPC router ... === TestName:
> >
> >>> test_01_single_VPC_iptables_policies | Status : SUCCESS === ok Test
> >
> >>> redundant router internals ... === TestName:
> >
> >>> test_01_isolate_network_FW_PF_default_routes_egress_true | Status :
> >
> >>> SUCCESS === ok Test redundant router internals ... === TestName:
> >
> >>> test_02_isolate_network_FW_PF_default_routes_egress_false | Status :
> >
> >>> SUCCESS === ok Test redundant router internals ... === TestName:
> >
> >>> test_01_RVR_Network_FW_PF_SSH_default_routes_egress_true | Status :
> >
> >>> SUCCESS === ok Test redundant router internals ... === TestName:
> >
> >>> test_02_RVR_Network_FW_PF_SSH_default_routes_egress_false | Status :
> >
> >>> SUCCESS === ok Create a VPC with two networks with one VM in each
> >
> >>> network and test nics after destroy ... === TestName:
> >
> >>> test_01_VPC_nics_after_destroy | Status : SUCCESS === ok Create a
> >>> VPC
> >
> >>> with two networks with one VM in each network and test default
> >>> routes
> >
> >>> ... === TestName: test_02_VPC_default_routes | Status : SUCCESS ===
> >
> >>> ok Check the password file in the Router VM ... === TestName:
> >
> >>> test_isolate_network_password_server | Status : SUCCESS === ok Check
> >
> >>> that the /etc/dhcphosts.txt doesn't contain duplicate IPs ... ===
> >
> >>> TestName: test_router_dhcphosts | Status : SUCCESS === ok Test to
> >
> >>> create Load balancing rule with source NAT ... === TestName:
> >
> >>> test_01_create_lb_rule_src_nat | Status : SUCCESS === ok Test to
> >
> >>> create Load balancing rule with non source NAT ... === TestName:
> >
> >>> test_02_create_lb_rule_non_nat | Status : SUCCESS === ok Test for
> >
> >>> assign & removing load balancing rule ... === TestName:
> >
> >>> test_assign_and_removal_lb | Status : SUCCESS === ok Test to verify
> >
> >>> access to loadbalancer haproxy admin stats page ... === TestName:
> >
> >>> test02_internallb_haproxy_stats_on_all_interfaces | Status :
> >
> >>> EXCEPTION === ERROR Test create, assign, remove of an Internal LB
> >
> >>> with roundrobin http traffic to 3 vm's ... === TestName:
> >
> >>> test_01_internallb_roundrobin_1VPC_3VM_HTTP_port80 | Status :
> >
> >>> EXCEPTION === ERROR Test SSVM Internals ... === TestName:
> >
> >>> test_03_ssvm_internals | Status : SUCCESS === ok Test CPVM Internals
> >
> >>> ... SKIP: Marvin configuration has no host credentials to check
> >
> >>> router services Test stop SSVM ... === TestName: test_05_stop_ssvm |
> >
> >>> Status : SUCCESS === ok Test stop CPVM ... SKIP: Marvin
> >>> configuration
> >
> >>> has no host credentials to check router services Test reboot SSVM ...
> >
> >>> === TestName: test_07_reboot_ssvm | Status : SUCCESS === ok Test
> >
> >>> reboot CPVM ... SKIP: Marvin configuration has no host credentials
> >>> to
> >
> >>> check router services Test destroy SSVM ... SKIP: Marvin
> >
> >>> configuration has no host credentials to check router services Test
> >
> >>> destroy CPVM ... === TestName: test_10_destroy_cpvm | Status :
> >
> >>> SUCCESS === ok Test Remote Access VPN in VPC ... === TestName:
> >
> >>> test_vpc_remote_access_vpn | Status : FAILED === FAIL Test VPN in
> >>> VPC
> >
> >>> ... === TestName: test_vpc_site2site_vpn | Status : EXCEPTION ===
> >
> >>> ERROR Test for port forwarding on source NAT ... === TestName:
> >
> >>> test_01_port_fwd_on_src_nat | Status : SUCCESS === ok Test for port
> >
> >>> forwarding on non source NAT ... === TestName:
> >
> >>> test_02_port_fwd_on_non_src_nat | Status : SUCCESS === ok Test for
> >
> >>> reboot router ... === TestName: test_reboot_router | Status :
> >>> SUCCESS
> >
> >>> === ok Test for Router rules for network rules on acquired public IP
> >
> >>> ... === TestName:
> >
> >>> test_network_rules_acquired_public_ip_1_static_nat_rule | Status :
> >
> >>> SUCCESS === ok Test for Router rules for network rules on acquired
> >
> >>> public IP ... === TestName:
> >
> >>> test_network_rules_acquired_public_ip_2_nat_rule | Status : SUCCESS
> >
> >>> === ok Test for Router rules for network rules on acquired public IP
> >
> >>> ... === TestName:
> >
> >>> test_network_rules_acquired_public_ip_3_Load_Balancer_Rule | Status :
> >
> >>> SUCCESS === ok
> >
> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> -
> >
> >>> -
> >
> >>> Ran 33 tests in 9352.773s
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> FAILED (SKIP=5, errors=3, failures=2)
> >
> >>> (END)
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> :: Test results for Environment 2 ::
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> Test router internal advanced zone ... SKIP: Marvin configuration
> >>> has no host
> >
> >>> credentials                            to check router services
> >
> >>> Test restart network ... === TestName:
> >
> >>> test_03_restart_network_cleanup | Status
> >
> >>> : SUCCESS ===
> >
> >>> ok
> >
> >>> Test router basic setup ... === TestName: test_05_router_basic | Status
:
> >
> >>> SUCCESS ===
> >
> >>> ok
> >
> >>> Test router advanced setup ... === TestName: test_06_router_advanced |
> >>> Status :
> >
> >>> SUCCESS ===
> >
> >>> ok
> >
> >>> Test stop router ... === TestName: test_07_stop_router | Status :
> >
> >>> SUCCESS === ok Test start router ... === TestName:
> >
> >>> test_08_start_router | Status : SUCCESS === ok Test reboot router ...
> >
> >>> === TestName: test_09_reboot_router | Status : SUCCESS === ok Test
> >
> >>> reset virtual machine on reboot ... === TestName:
> >
> >>> test_01_reset_vm_on_reboot | Status : SUCCESS === ok Test advanced
> >
> >>> zone virtual router ... === TestName: test_advZoneVirtualRouter |
> >
> >>> Status : SUCCESS === ok Test Deploy Virtual Machine ... === TestName:
> >
> >>> test_deploy_vm | Status : SUCCESS === ok Test Multiple Deploy
> >>> Virtual
> >
> >>> Machine ... === TestName: test_deploy_vm_multiple | Status : SUCCESS
> >
> >>> === ok Test Stop Virtual Machine ... === TestName: test_01_stop_vm |
> >
> >>> Status : SUCCESS === ok Test Start Virtual Machine ... === TestName:
> >
> >>> test_02_start_vm | Status : SUCCESS === ok Test Reboot Virtual
> >
> >>> Machine ... === TestName: test_03_reboot_vm | Status :
> >
> >>> SUCCESS ===
> >
> >>> ok
> >
> >>> Test destroy Virtual Machine ... === TestName: test_06_destroy_vm | Status
> >>> :
> >
> >>> SUCCESS ===
> >
> >>> ok
> >
> >>> Test recover Virtual Machine ... === TestName: test_07_restore_vm | Status
> >>> :
> >
> >>> SUCCESS ===
> >
> >>> ok
> >
> >>> Test migrate VM ... === TestName: test_08_migrate_vm | Status :
> >
> >>> SUCCESS === ok Test destroy(expunge) Virtual Machine ... ===
> >
> >>> TestName: test_09_expunge_vm | Status : SUCCESS === ok Test
> >
> >>> start/stop of router after addition of one guest network ... === TestName:
> >
> >>> test_01_start_stop_router_after_addition_of_one_guest_network | Status :
> >
> >>> SUCCESS ===
> >
> >>> ok
> >
> >>> Test reboot of router after addition of one guest network ... ===
> >>> TestName:
> >
> >>> test_02_reboot_router_after_addition_of_one_guest_network | Status :
> >
> >>> SUCCESS === ok Test to change service offering of router after
> >
> >>> addition of one guest network ... === TestName:
> >
> >>> test_04_chg_srv_off_router_after_addition_of_one_guest_network | Status
:
> >
> >>> SUCCESS ===
> >
> >>> ok
> >
> >>> Test destroy of router after addition of one guest network ... ===
> >>> TestName:
> >
> >>> test_05_destroy_router_after_addition_of_one_guest_network | Status :
> >
> >>> SUCCESS === ok Test to stop and start router after creation of VPC
> >
> >>> ... === TestName:
> >
> >>> test_01_stop_start_router_after_creating_vpc | Status : SUCCESS ===
> >
> >>> ok Test to reboot the router after creating a VPC ... === TestName:
> >
> >>> test_02_reboot_router_after_creating_vpc | Status : SUCCESS === ok
> >
> >>> Tests to change service offering of the Router after ... === TestName:
> >
> >>> test_04_change_service_offerring_vpc | Status : SUCCESS === ok Test
> >
> >>> to destroy the router after creating a VPC ... === TestName:
> >
> >>> test_05_destroy_router_after_creating_vpc | Status : SUCCESS === ok
> >
> >>> Test to create service offering ... === TestName:
> >
> >>> test_01_create_service_offering | Status : SUCCESS === ok Test to
> >
> >>> update existing service offering ... === TestName:
> >
> >>> test_02_edit_service_offering | Status : SUCCESS === ok Test to
> >
> >>> delete service offering ... === TestName:
> >
> >>> test_03_delete_service_offering | Status : SUCCESS === ok Test
> >>> create
> >
> >>> VPC offering ... === TestName: test_01_create_vpc_offering | Status
> >
> >>> : SUCCESS ===
> >
> >>> ok
> >
> >>> Test VPC offering without load balancing service ... === TestName:
> >
> >>> test_03_vpc_off_without_lb | Status : SUCCESS === ok Test VPC
> >
> >>> offering without static NAT service ... === TestName:
> >
> >>> test_04_vpc_off_without_static_nat | Status : SUCCESS === ok Test
> >>> VPC
> >
> >>> offering without port forwarding service ... === TestName:
> >
> >>> test_05_vpc_off_without_pf | Status : SUCCESS === ok Test VPC
> >
> >>> offering with invalid services ... === TestName:
> >
> >>> test_06_vpc_off_invalid_services | Status : SUCCESS === ok Test
> >
> >>> update VPC offering ... === TestName: test_07_update_vpc_off | Status :
> >
> >>> SUCCESS ===
> >
> >>> ok
> >
> >>> Test list VPC offering ... === TestName: test_08_list_vpc_off |
> >
> >>> Status : SUCCESS === ok test_09_create_redundant_vpc_offering
> >
> >>> (integration.component.test_vpc_offerings.TestVPCOffering) ... ===
> >>> TestName:
> >
> >>> test_09_create_redundant_vpc_offering | Status : SUCCESS === ok
> >
> >>> test_privategw_acl (integration.smoke.test_privategw_acl.TestPrivateGwACL)
> >>> ...
> >
> >>> === TestName: test_privategw_acl | Status : SUCCESS === ok Test for
> >
> >>> delete account ... === TestName: test_delete_account | Status :
> >
> >>> SUCCESS === ok Test for Associate/Disassociate public IP address for
> >
> >>> admin account ... ===
> >
> >>> TestName: test_public_ip_admin_account | Status : SUCCESS === ok
> >>> Test
> >
> >>> for Associate/Disassociate public IP address for user account ...
> >>> ===
> >
> >>> TestName: test_public_ip_user_account | Status : SUCCESS === ok Test
> >
> >>> for release public IP address ... === TestName: test_releaseIP | Status
:
> >
> >>> SUCCESS ===
> >
> >>> ok
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> -
> >
> >>> -
> >
> >>> Ran 42 tests in 5463.487s
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> OK (SKIP=1)
> >
> >>> (END)
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> On 05 Nov 2015, at 20:13, Nux!
> >>> <nux@li.nux.ro<mailto:nux@li.nux.ro<mailto:nux@li.nux.ro%3cmailto:nux@li.nux.ro>>>
> >>> wrote:
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> Installation on CentOS 6 mgmt and HVs worked great, added some
> >
> >>> templates, deployed some instances, no issues.
> >
> >>> I'll get back if I hit problems.
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> Lucian
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> --
> >
> >>> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> Nux!
> >
> >>> www.nux.ro<http://www.nux.ro/<http://www.nux.ro%3chttp:/www.nux.ro/>
> >>> >
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> ----- Original Message -----
> >
> >>> From: "Nux!"
> >>> <nux@li.nux.ro<mailto:nux@li.nux.ro<mailto:nux@li.nux.ro%3cmailto:nu
> >>> x@li.nux.ro>>>
> >
> >>> To:
> >>> dev@cloudstack.apache.org<mailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org<mailto:de
> >>> v@cloudstack.apache.org%3cmailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org>>
> >
> >>> Sent: Thursday, 5 November, 2015 08:48:38
> >
> >>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> Thanks Remi!
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> --
> >
> >>> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> Nux!
> >
> >>> www.nux.ro<http://www.nux.ro<http://www.nux.ro%3chttp:/www.nux.ro>>
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> ----- Original Message -----
> >
> >>> From: "Remi Bergsma"
> >
> >>> <RBergsma@schubergphilis.com<mailto:RBergsma@schubergphilis.com<mail
> >>> to:RBergsma@schubergphilis.com%3cmailto:RBergsma@schubergphilis.com>
> >>> >>
> >
> >>> To:
> >>> dev@cloudstack.apache.org<mailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org<mailto:de
> >>> v@cloudstack.apache.org%3cmailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org>>
> >
> >>> Sent: Wednesday, 4 November, 2015 20:45:59
> >
> >>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> Kicked off some Jenkins builds:
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> CentOS 6 packages:
> >
> >>> http://jenkins.buildacloud.org/view/parameterized/job/cloudstack-rpm
> >>> -
> >
> >>> packages-with-branch-parameter/lastSuccessfulBuild/artifact/dist/rpm
> >>> b
> >
> >>> uild/RPMS/x86_64/
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> CentOS 7 packages:
> >
> >>> http://jenkins.buildacloud.org/view/parameterized/job/cloudstack-rpm
> >>> -
> >
> >>> packages-with-branch-parameter-centos7/lastSuccessfulBuild/artifact/
> >>> d
> >
> >>> ist/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> Ubuntu Trusty packages:
> >
> >>> http://cloudstack.apt-get.eu/ubuntu/dists/trusty/4.6/pool/
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> SystemVM template:
> >
> >>> http://jenkins.buildacloud.org/view/parameterized/job/parameterized-
> >>> s
> >
> >>> ytemvm/lastSuccessfulBuild/artifact/tools/appliance/dist/
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> You can always build packages from the source:
> >
> >>> cd packaging
> >
> >>> ./package.sh -h
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> Happy testing!
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> Regards,
> >
> >>> Remi
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> On 04/11/15 18:12, "Remi Bergsma"
> >
> >>> <RBergsma@schubergphilis.com<mailto:RBergsma@schubergphilis.com<mailto:RBergsma@schubergphilis.com%3cmailto:RBergsma@schubergphilis.com>>>
> >>> wrote:
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> The jobs failed due to the git clone failing (time out). I also
> >
> >>> experience it is quite slow at the moment.
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> It is mirrored here (same commit id):
> >
> >>> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/tree/4.6.0-RC20151104T1522
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> Regards,
> >
> >>> Remi
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> On 04/11/15 17:17, "Rajani Karuturi"
> >
> >>> <Rajani.Karuturi@citrix.com<mailto:Rajani.Karuturi@citrix.com<mailto:Rajani.Karuturi@citrix.com%3cmailto:Rajani.Karuturi@citrix.com>>>
> >>> wrote:
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> I started jenkins builds for cloudstack RPM packages and systemvm
> >
> >>> templates for this branch here
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> http://jenkins.buildacloud.org/view/parameterized/job/cloudstack-rpm
> >>> -
> >
> >>> packages-with-branch-parameter/19/console
> >
> >>> http://jenkins.buildacloud.org/view/parameterized/job/parameterized-
> >>> s
> >
> >>> ytemvm/3/console
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> We can use them once the build is complete.
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> ~Rajani
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> On 04-Nov-2015, at 8:58 PM, Nux!
> >
> >>> <nux@li.nux.ro<mailto:nux@li.nux.ro<mailto:nux@li.nux.ro%3cmailto:nux@li.nux.ro>><mailto:nux@li.nux.ro>>
> >>> wrote:
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> Hi,
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> Has jenkins built rpms for this somewhere?
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> --
> >
> >>> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> Nux!
> >
> >>> www.nux.ro<http://www.nux.ro><http://www.nux.ro<http://www.nux.ro%3c
> >>> http:/www.nux.ro%3e%3chttp:/www.nux.ro>>
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> ----- Original Message -----
> >
> >>> From: "Remi Bergsma"
> >
> >>> <RBergsma@schubergphilis.com<mailto:RBergsma@schubergphilis.com<mail
> >>> to:RBergsma@schubergphilis.com%3cmailto:RBergsma@schubergphilis.com>
> >>> >>
> >
> >>> To:
> >>> dev@cloudstack.apache.org<mailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org<mailto:de
> >>> v@cloudstack.apache.org%3cmailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org>>
> >
> >>> Sent: Wednesday, 4 November, 2015 14:55:11
> >
> >>> Subject: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> Hi all,
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> I've created a 4.6.0 release candidate, with the following artifacts
> >
> >>> up for a
> >
> >>> vote:
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> Git Branch and Commit SH:
> >
> >>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=shortlog;
> >>> h
> >
> >>> =4.6.0-RC20151104T1522
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> Commit: b0ebe68e375432b28eef031ab62ccd5831234c77
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> Source release (checksums and signatures are available at the same
> >
> >>> location):
> >
> >>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/cloudstack/4.6.0/
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> PGP release keys (signed using A47DDC4F):
> >
> >>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/cloudstack/KEYS
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> Vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> For sanity in tallying the vote, can PMC members please be sure to
> >
> >>> indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> [ ] +1  approve
> >
> >>> [ ] +0  no opinion
> >
> >>> [ ] -1  disapprove (and reason why)
> >
> >
> Find out more about ShapeBlue and our range of CloudStack related services
> 
> IaaS Cloud Design & Build<http://shapeblue.com/iaas-cloud-design-and-build//>
> CSForge – rapid IaaS deployment framework<http://shapeblue.com/csforge/>
> CloudStack Consulting<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-consultancy/>
> CloudStack Software
> Engineering<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-software-engineering/>
> CloudStack Infrastructure
> Support<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-infrastructure-support/>
> CloudStack Bootcamp Training
> Courses<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-training/>
> 
> This email and any attachments to it may be confidential and are intended
> solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any views or
> opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily
> represent those of Shape Blue Ltd or related companies. If you are not the
> intended recipient of this email, you must neither take any action based upon
> its contents, nor copy or show it to anyone. Please contact the sender if you
> believe you have received this email in error. Shape Blue Ltd is a company
> incorporated in England & Wales. ShapeBlue Services India LLP is a company
> incorporated in India and is operated under license from Shape Blue Ltd. Shape
> Blue Brasil Consultoria Ltda is a company incorporated in Brasil and is
> operated under license from Shape Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue SA Pty Ltd is a company
> registered by The Republic of South Africa and is traded under license from
> Shape Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue is a registered trademark.

Mime
View raw message