incubator-cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Noah Slater <nsla...@tumbolia.org>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Install.sh vs. pacakge repos
Date Tue, 11 Sep 2012 19:20:14 GMT
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 8:02 PM, Wido den Hollander <wido@widodh.nl> wrote:

>
>
> On 09/11/2012 08:56 PM, Noah Slater wrote:
>
>> Wido, see my comments about the problems with hosting an APT repository on
>> ASF infra.
>>
>>
> Yes, our e-mails crossed. Yours arrived while I was typing mine.
>
>
>  * Can't think of a way it would work with the mirrors.
>> * If you don't use the mirrors, infra might not like the bandwidth.
>>
>> However:
>>
>> * Do we already host repositories for Java?
>>
>
> No, we don't.


By "we", I meant the ASF. :)


>
>  * Can we set something up for debs?
>>
>>
> I'm offering bandwidth on our company servers under cloudstack.apt-get.eu,
> more then enough bandwidth available.
>
> We should probably use a cloudstack.org hostname just to make sure we can
> switch without users knowing.
>

That sounds fine to me.

I would like someone else to weigh in on the "binary packages on non-ASF
hardware" issue though.

I don't think it's an issue, but if nobody else knows for sure, I can
follow this up elsewhere.

Wido
>
>
>> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 7:50 PM, Wido den Hollander <wido@widodh.nl>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> On 09/11/2012 05:45 PM, David Nalley wrote:
>>>
>>>  On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 8:23 AM, Wido den Hollander <wido@widodh.nl>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>  On 09/11/2012 12:16 PM, Suresh Sadhu wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> HI All,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Installer fail to read the cloud packages  and MS installation on
>>>>>> Ubuntu
>>>>>> 12.04 was not successful(No packages were installed) Raised a blocker
>>>>>> bug.
>>>>>> Please find the issue details in the below mentioned issue:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  I'd like to bring this up again, do we REALLY want this install.sh
>>>>> script?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This really deserves its own thread, because it won't receive the
>>>> attention it deserves in the original thread.
>>>>
>>>> I talked with infra about this a few weeks back, and while they said
>>>> they really wanted downstreams to package, they weren't vehemently
>>>> opposed to use creating our own repo, but we'd have to figure out how
>>>> to make it work with the mirror system.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  A Debian/Ubutnu repository is just a bunch of directories and files,
>>> that
>>> could be distributed I think?
>>>
>>> The question is, do we want this to go on ASF infra or us an external
>>> mirror for it?
>>>
>>>
>>>   Personally - the packages as they exist are great for people doing a
>>>
>>>> first, small scale install, but it doesn't scale. While I am not
>>>> necessarily opposed to the installer, I also recognize the problems
>>>> from a real world deployment perspective.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  I disagree on the first point. When manually installing packages with
>>> dpkg
>>> you will run into dependency hell. You (you=install script) manually have
>>> to "apt-get install" several packages.
>>>
>>> The problem you run into here is that you start doing redundant work. In
>>> the "control" file you specify which packages you depend on. If you'd use
>>> apt(itude) it will resolve those dependencies for you. But when doing a
>>> manual install with dpkg it will complain about every single package
>>> which
>>> is missing.
>>>
>>> This leads to having install.sh a couple of directives to install
>>> packages
>>> we already specific in the control file. On the longer run you get
>>> packages
>>> installed by install.sh which are no longer required, but apt has no way
>>> of
>>> knowing they can be removed.
>>>
>>> Packages should always enter a Debian system through apt to know which
>>> package was depending on which package so apt(itude) can do their work.
>>>
>>> Adding a repository and install CloudStack is just 4 commands, isn't that
>>> simple enough?
>>>
>>> $ echo "deb http://cloudstack.apt-get.eu/****ubuntu<http://cloudstack.apt-get.eu/**ubuntu>
>>> <http://cloudstack.apt-**get.eu/ubuntu<http://cloudstack.apt-get.eu/ubuntu>>$(lsb_release
>>> -s -c) 4.0" > /etc/apt/sources.list.d/
>>> **cloudstack.list
>>> $ wget -O - http://cloudstack.apt-get.eu/****release.asc|apt-key<http://cloudstack.apt-get.eu/**release.asc%7Capt-key>
>>> <http://**cloudstack.apt-get.eu/release.**asc%7Capt-key<http://cloudstack.apt-get.eu/release.asc%7Capt-key>>add
>>> -
>>>
>>> $ apt-get update
>>> $ apt-get install cloud-agent
>>>
>>> Again, the repo of mine is just an example :)
>>>
>>>
>>>   However, there is an impact, at a minimum all of our documentation
>>>
>>>> will need rewriting, so personally, I'd prefer that for 4.0.0 - that
>>>> we do repos if we can figure it out in time, and keep the installer as
>>>> an option as well.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Re-writing the docs is a couple of hours work I'd be more then happy to
>>> do
>>> for 4.0 if we go for a repo.
>>>
>>> I honestly must admit that in some recent docs I already assumed there
>>> would be a repo for 4.0...
>>>
>>> It would be awesome if Jenkins could produce packages and send them to
>>> the
>>> mirror, but it's more then doable to build the packages locally and
>>> upload
>>> them, it's not like we are doing 10 releases a month.
>>>
>>> It's just placing the packages in the "pool" directory and have a script
>>> re-scan the repo.
>>>
>>> The question remains: Do we want this to be on ASF infra or do we host
>>> this externally?
>>>
>>> Wido
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>


-- 
NS

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message