incubator-cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Nalley <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] systemvms
Date Thu, 05 Jul 2012 18:58:22 GMT
On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 2:35 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
<> wrote:
> Ah, Wido puts it much better. David's email kind of alarmed me.

What did I say that alarmed you?? :)
If it makes you feel better your email alarms me :)

> On 7/5/12 7:24 AM, "Wido den Hollander" <> wrote:
> [snip]
>>I agree. In essence the System VM's are more (talking KVM-wise!) than a
>>Debian installation with the Java agent running in them.
> In the future, there may be even be multiple system vm templates. T
>>Right now you have to download this weird qcow2 from the CS website, but
>>that should be different I think:
>>You set up CloudStack, configure your zone and then it will ask you to
>>provide the System VM template.
>>We can still provide a System VM template we build from scratch and put
>>the image online somewhere, but users also have the freedom to upload
>>their own.
> +1. A default systemvm template is very important. In fact for regression
> tests, smoke tests etc, this would be used.
> Also, most *users* of cloudstack would have very little idea on how to
> roll their own systemvm.

So the issue with a default systemVM is that Apache CloudStack can't
distribute it. (unless we move to a BSD). Or at least - in their
current form, Apache CloudStack can't distribute the systemVMs.  Soooo
what do we do?

>>In the repository we should only keep what we really need. When building
>>RPM's and Deb's we build the proper packages for Debian and Fedora which
>>you can install and depend on everything you need.
>>Those packages can install the correct init scripts which are needed for
>>starting everything from the first time.
>>These init script will mount the second disk in the System VM and
>>retrieve all the relevant configuration from there.
>>We should start with actually building .debs and .rpms for the System
>>VM's and not have these scripts just floating around and magically
>>finding their way into the System VM's.
> +1. Although this could take a long time and could gate the 4.0 release if
> made a prerequisite.

While .debs and .rpms are not necessarily mandates - what would we
ship? We essentially can't ship a linux-based VM.

>>The scripts inside the repository will probably comply with the Apache
>>License, although that's for KVM, I'm not sure about Xen.
> There's very little xen-specific stuff inside the vm. Some of it may
> relate to xen-tools. That can be removed AFAIK, since it actually hinders
> the xenserver upgrade process.

View raw message