cloud January 2017

cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org

27 participants
73 discussions

Custom built tree with new kernel
by Dusty Mabe 22 Jan '17

22 Jan '17

Please test it out so that we can get the new kernel karma'd as soon as possible: ostree remote add --set=gpg-verify=false kerneltest https://dustymabe.fedorapeople.org/repo/ rpm-ostree rebase kerneltest:fedora-atomic/25/x86_64/docker-host This tree currently has the following changes from current stable: Changed: kernel 4.9.4-201.fc25 -> 4.9.5-200.fc25 kernel-core 4.9.4-201.fc25 -> 4.9.5-200.fc25 kernel-modules 4.9.4-201.fc25 -> 4.9.5-200.fc25 kubernetes 1.4.7-1.fc25 -> 1.5.2-2.fc25 kubernetes-client 1.4.7-1.fc25 -> 1.5.2-2.fc25 kubernetes-master 1.4.7-1.fc25 -> 1.5.2-2.fc25 kubernetes-node 1.4.7-1.fc25 -> 1.5.2-2.fc25 I'll give a link to the bodhi update when it is submitted. Dusty

2 4

Re: [atomic-devel] F25: older versions of cockpit in atomic host
by Dusty Mabe 20 Jan '17

20 Jan '17

On 01/17/2017 11:26 AM, Stef Walter wrote: > > Indeed. We'll be releasing Cockpit 129 shortly, which will include an > Obsoletes directive in the RPM and should fix this issue. Sorry for the > breakage. No worries. Glad I saw it and we plan on detecting this sort of thing in the future. Dusty

1 0

F25: older versions of cockpit in atomic host
by Dusty Mabe 20 Jan '17

20 Jan '17

I noticed today when comparing two trees, one from Dec25 and the latest one, that the version of cockpit went backwards. !cockpit-bridge-126-1.fc25.x86_64 =cockpit-bridge-120-1.fc25.x86_64 !cockpit-docker-126-1.fc25.x86_64 =cockpit-docker-120-1.fc25.x86_64 !cockpit-networkmanager-126-1.fc25.noarch =cockpit-networkmanager-120-1.fc25.noarch !cockpit-ostree-126-1.fc25.x86_64 =cockpit-ostree-120-1.fc25.x86_64 !cockpit-shell-126-1.fc25.noarch =cockpit-shell-120-1.fc25.noarch This is actually because cockpit changed cockpit-shell to cockpit-system [1] but we are explicitly including cockpit-shell in our manifest [2]. This means that the only version it could find that had cockpit-networkmanager and cockpit-shell was the one from fedora 25 release (not updates). I'll open an issue to try to come up with ideas on how to prevent this type of thing from happening in the future without going noticed. Dusty [1] https://github.com/cockpit-project/cockpit/commit/e13e193ec19708f6488c32be0… [2] https://pagure.io/fedora-atomic/blob/f25/f/fedora-atomic-docker-host.json#_…

1 1

About the recent failures of Atomic images on Autocloud
by Kushal Das 20 Jan '17

20 Jan '17

Hi, I finally managed to reproduce the error on a local box. After doing the reboot like in [1], the tool can not ssh back into the vm. When I tried the same on debug mode on, it still fails for some time, and then randomly allows to ssh again. I could not reproduce this using the same images over our OpenStack cloud. Any tips will be helpful to find the cause. [1] https://apps.fedoraproject.org/autocloud/jobs/1845/output#264 Kushal -- Fedora Cloud Engineer CPython Core Developer https://kushaldas.in https://dgplug.org

6 10

PR: Cleaning up Fedora Docker image kickstart file
by Dusty Mabe 20 Jan '17

20 Jan '17

Please review the changes: https://pagure.io/fedora-kickstarts/pull-request/119

1 0

Delay in Fedora Atomic 2-week release
by Josh Berkus 19 Jan '17

19 Jan '17

Folks: The biweekly Fedora Atomic Host release will be delayed by approximately one week, due to the need to resolve two issues: 1) Kernel update breaks container networking: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1414068 2) UEFI boot fix for ISO: https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/185 Our current plan is to release next week, and then again the following week to get back on schedule. -- -- Josh Berkus Project Atomic Red Hat OSAS

1 0

[atomic-wg] Issue #185 `November 21 ISO is not bootable`
by Pagure 19 Jan '17

19 Jan '17

jberkus reported a new issue against the project: `atomic-wg` that you are following: `` I'm currently testing the November 21 ISOs by installing on my minnowboard cluster. It seems to be the case that these ISOs are not bootable; after getting through most of the install, they give the following error: failed to write boot loader configration Once the new ISOs are available, we need to retest and see if this is a general issue. `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/185

3 34

Hardware for FOSP
by Michael Scherer 18 Jan '17

18 Jan '17

Hi, so as people asked me on irc, it seems there was a lack of communication regarding the hardware for the FOSP project (https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/153) Due to internal changes (on top of regular changes) on the other side of the RH firewall, the acquisition of the servers and the allocation of the budget took a much longer time than planned, and we got the fund allocated last week. So we started working right away on a quote for hardware, and for various reason, we settled on the following to be shared between the requirement for my team (OSAS) and Fedora Cloud: - 1 6U super micro chassis, https://www.supermicro.com/products/MicroBlade/index.cfm IT can hold 28 blades servers. So to fill the chassis, we selected: - 2 * MBI-6418A-T5H, with 4 nodes, each having 4G of ram and a small disk ( 128 or 64G ssd, depending on price) - 2 * MBI-6118D-T4, with 4 disk of 1T (or 2T) per disk - 16 * MBI-6128R-T2, each with 128G of ram, with ssd and 256G if possible. and free slots for later (8 slots). The 4 first blades are to be used by OSAS, to host various small services and backups. The rest is for Fedora, and the 16 MBI-6128R-T2 would have at least 128G of ram, with 256G ssd, 2 xeon with 18 cores, 1G connectivity. I did try to optimize to not have too much unused ressources, but that's gonna still be a lot of ressources. We plan to host that in the new space we are gonna have near Raleigh, in the community cage. I do not have a public page to give about that yet, since we are still working on hosting public pages and a website about that, but people can ping me if they want more information on this. For the deployment itself, I had emergency (server, laptop) that did prevent me from working more on it for now. -- Michael Scherer Sysadmin, Community Infrastructure and Platform, OSAS

2 1

[atomic-wg] Issue #153 `design, deploy and document Fedora OpenShift Playground (FOSP)`
by Pagure 18 Jan '17

18 Jan '17

misc added a new comment to an issue you are following: `` Sent a email regarding hardware on the list. Didn't had time to do anything regarding deployment. The current status is still "playbook are here, but we need to connect that to FAS". `` To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/153

1 0

Fedora 2wk Atomic Blocker Bugs
by Dusty Mabe 18 Jan '17

18 Jan '17

There are a few bugs that are blocking 2wk release. - one with the kernel that causes kube dns to not work * https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1414068 - one with kube that causes selinux breakage * https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1414096 We need to get these resolved before our next release. Hoping it will happen this week. Dusty

1 1

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

cloud January 2017