incubator-cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Chiradeep Vittal <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] systemvms
Date Thu, 05 Jul 2012 18:35:26 GMT
Ah, Wido puts it much better. David's email kind of alarmed me.

On 7/5/12 7:24 AM, "Wido den Hollander" <> wrote:

>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.

>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.

>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