Previously I built & uploaded a Fedora 16 cloud image for use with OpenStack:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/cloud/2012-March/001306.html
It took me a while to get around to looking at Fedora 17, but I finally built an equivalent for that too which is available here:
http://berrange.fedorapeople.org/images/2012-11-15/
Use as follows
# glance image-create \ --container-format bare --disk-format qcow2 \ --name f17-x86_64-openstack-sda \ --copy-from http://berrange.fedorapeople.org/images/2012-11-15/f17-x86_64-openstack-sda....
# nova boot \ --key-name demokey \ --image f17-x86_64-openstack-sda \ --flavor m1.tiny \ f17demo1
# nova list
# ssh ec2-user@<ip address>
Fedora 18 to come in the future, if it ever becomes stable enough to install :-)
Regards, Daniel
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 12:04:46PM +0000, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
It took me a while to get around to looking at Fedora 17, but I finally built an equivalent for that too which is available here:
Oh, hey; we should coordinate on this. I've been working on the F18 image.
Are you basing the image kickstart on the ones at
http://git.fedorahosted.org/cgit/cloud-kickstarts.git
or using soemthing else?
Fedora 18 to come in the future, if it ever becomes stable enough to install :-)
What tool are you using for image creation? With appliance-creator or ami-creator, anaconda doesn't come into it....
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 07:46:49AM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 12:04:46PM +0000, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
It took me a while to get around to looking at Fedora 17, but I finally built an equivalent for that too which is available here:
Oh, hey; we should coordinate on this. I've been working on the F18 image.
Are you basing the image kickstart on the ones at
http://git.fedorahosted.org/cgit/cloud-kickstarts.git
or using soemthing else?
appliance-creator + kickstart, as per the README in the same directory:
http://berrange.fedorapeople.org/images/2012-11-15/
IIRC, I used the cloud-kickstarts.git files as the original basis for my images.
Fedora 18 to come in the future, if it ever becomes stable enough to install :-)
What tool are you using for image creation? With appliance-creator or ami-creator, anaconda doesn't come into it....
True, and just after i sent this, I think i might have got a successful build. Just going to try testing it.
Daniel
Hi Daniel,
On 11/16/2012 01:59 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
appliance-creator + kickstart, as per the README in the same directory:
I wasn't aware of thincrust & appliance tools until your email - they look cool!
What, if any, is the relationship between these and oz? Does Oz use them? Or are they totally independent and kind of competing technologies? Or do they do different things?
Thanks! Dave.
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 03:12:39PM +0100, Dave Neary wrote:
Hi Daniel,
On 11/16/2012 01:59 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
appliance-creator + kickstart, as per the README in the same directory:
I wasn't aware of thincrust & appliance tools until your email - they look cool!
What, if any, is the relationship between these and oz? Does Oz use them? Or are they totally independent and kind of competing technologies? Or do they do different things?
They're completely different from Oz really, except that both can use kickstart files for their automation.
appliance-creator is basically running yum in a chroot and handling the kickstart config itself.
Oz boots KVM and runs the *real* installer in a guest, providing it with the kickstart.
Due to its architecture, appliance-creator is doomed to only ever supporting Fedora, where as Oz can support every OS that is capable of running inside KVM.
Daniel
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 02:31:40PM +0000, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
They're completely different from Oz really, except that both can use kickstart files for their automation.
We've got other tools along these lines too:
appliance-creator is basically running yum in a chroot and handling the kickstart config itself.
ami-creator (from Jeremy Katz and also maintained by Eucalyptus) does this as well.
Oz boots KVM and runs the *real* installer in a guest, providing it with the kickstart.
And this is also done by the new livemedia-creator from the Anaconda team.
Hi,
On 11/16/2012 03:51 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 02:31:40PM +0000, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
They're completely different from Oz really, except that both can use kickstart files for their automation.
We've got other tools along these lines too:
appliance-creator is basically running yum in a chroot and handling the kickstart config itself.
ami-creator (from Jeremy Katz and also maintained by Eucalyptus) does this as well.
Oz boots KVM and runs the *real* installer in a guest, providing it with the kickstart.
And this is also done by the new livemedia-creator from the Anaconda team.
So which one is the "best" now? In terms of community, momentum, features? What should we be using for virtual image creation for (for example) oVirt and OpenStack?
Cheers, Dave.
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 04:02:10PM +0100, Dave Neary wrote:
And this is also done by the new livemedia-creator from the Anaconda team.
So which one is the "best" now? In terms of community, momentum, features? What should we be using for virtual image creation for (for example) oVirt and OpenStack?
The thread titled 'tools for building cloud images in the buildsystem' here http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/infrastructure/2012-November/012317... is good background.
I think we need to make sure that Oz works with Fedora for people making their own images, and likewise Boxgrinder. For our own images, we're using appliance-creator now, but I think it makes sense to look at migrating to livemedia-creator for official Fedora 19 images.
Theoretically, these all use the exact same kickstart files, so the impact of switching is not high, and we should endeavor to make the cloud-kickstart files agnostic.
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 04:02:10PM +0100, Dave Neary wrote:
Hi,
On 11/16/2012 03:51 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 02:31:40PM +0000, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
They're completely different from Oz really, except that both can use kickstart files for their automation.
We've got other tools along these lines too:
appliance-creator is basically running yum in a chroot and handling the kickstart config itself.
ami-creator (from Jeremy Katz and also maintained by Eucalyptus) does this as well.
Oz boots KVM and runs the *real* installer in a guest, providing it with the kickstart.
And this is also done by the new livemedia-creator from the Anaconda team.
So which one is the "best" now? In terms of community, momentum, features? What should we be using for virtual image creation for (for example) oVirt and OpenStack?
Oz is the only real candidate here because it is the only one that is seriously targetting arbitrary guest OS distros, including Windows
https://github.com/clalancette/oz/wiki
so I discount appliance-creatoe/ami-creator/livemedia-creator as suitable for ovirt/OpenStack.
That said, we have broader plans in this area which will obsolete Oz to some degree. Oz does really 3 things
- Code to determine how to create a KVM instance for installing each OS - Kickstart file (or equivalent file for other distros) - Code to install further packages to the initial image.
The libosinfo library is providing a database of metadata about optimal hardware configuration for OS, so the hardcoded setup that Oz does should really all go away long term, and be replaced by metadata driven code.
Similarly the libosinfo library also decided that handling kickstart file generation is also within its scope. So again Oz code in this area should go away long term.
That leaves the only bit of truely Oz specific code being that which customizes the images post-install to add further packages. So the quesiton is whether this is useful enough to apps to justify them using Oz.
I really see oVirt / OpenStack (and virt-manager, virt-install, GNOME Boxes, and any other virt management app) as wanting to use libosinfo directly for doing most of the work for VM provisioning and/or image building. Using Oz likely won't buy them a whole lot of extra benefit. I see Oz remaining as primarily a end user command line tool for building images
Regards, Daniel
On 11/16/2012 10:15 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 04:02:10PM +0100, Dave Neary wrote:
Hi,
On 11/16/2012 03:51 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 02:31:40PM +0000, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
They're completely different from Oz really, except that both can use kickstart files for their automation.
We've got other tools along these lines too:
appliance-creator is basically running yum in a chroot and handling the kickstart config itself.
ami-creator (from Jeremy Katz and also maintained by Eucalyptus) does this as well.
Oz boots KVM and runs the *real* installer in a guest, providing it with the kickstart.
And this is also done by the new livemedia-creator from the Anaconda team.
So which one is the "best" now? In terms of community, momentum, features? What should we be using for virtual image creation for (for example) oVirt and OpenStack?
Oz is the only real candidate here because it is the only one that is seriously targetting arbitrary guest OS distros, including Windows
https://github.com/clalancette/oz/wiki
so I discount appliance-creatoe/ami-creator/livemedia-creator as suitable for ovirt/OpenStack.
That said, we have broader plans in this area which will obsolete Oz to some degree. Oz does really 3 things
- Code to determine how to create a KVM instance for installing each OS
- Kickstart file (or equivalent file for other distros)
- Code to install further packages to the initial image.
The libosinfo library is providing a database of metadata about optimal hardware configuration for OS, so the hardcoded setup that Oz does should really all go away long term, and be replaced by metadata driven code.
Similarly the libosinfo library also decided that handling kickstart file generation is also within its scope. So again Oz code in this area should go away long term.
That leaves the only bit of truely Oz specific code being that which customizes the images post-install to add further packages. So the quesiton is whether this is useful enough to apps to justify them using Oz.
I really see oVirt / OpenStack (and virt-manager, virt-install, GNOME Boxes, and any other virt management app) as wanting to use libosinfo directly for doing most of the work for VM provisioning and/or image building. Using Oz likely won't buy them a whole lot of extra benefit. I see Oz remaining as primarily a end user command line tool for building images
Regards, Daniel
There is also ImageFactory, which uses OZ.
The web site has step by step instructions for building and pushing. I've had success following them to build and push an f17 image to EC2. | |See the "ContactUs" link at the top for where/how to get help using it.
Joe V.
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 03:42:52PM -0500, jvlcek wrote:
On 11/16/2012 10:15 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 04:02:10PM +0100, Dave Neary wrote:
Hi,
On 11/16/2012 03:51 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 02:31:40PM +0000, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
They're completely different from Oz really, except that both can use kickstart files for their automation.
We've got other tools along these lines too:
appliance-creator is basically running yum in a chroot and handling the kickstart config itself.
ami-creator (from Jeremy Katz and also maintained by Eucalyptus) does this as well.
Oz boots KVM and runs the *real* installer in a guest, providing it with the kickstart.
And this is also done by the new livemedia-creator from the Anaconda team.
So which one is the "best" now? In terms of community, momentum, features? What should we be using for virtual image creation for (for example) oVirt and OpenStack?
Oz is the only real candidate here because it is the only one that is seriously targetting arbitrary guest OS distros, including Windows
https://github.com/clalancette/oz/wiki
so I discount appliance-creatoe/ami-creator/livemedia-creator as suitable for ovirt/OpenStack.
That said, we have broader plans in this area which will obsolete Oz to some degree. Oz does really 3 things
- Code to determine how to create a KVM instance for installing each OS
- Kickstart file (or equivalent file for other distros)
- Code to install further packages to the initial image.
The libosinfo library is providing a database of metadata about optimal hardware configuration for OS, so the hardcoded setup that Oz does should really all go away long term, and be replaced by metadata driven code.
Similarly the libosinfo library also decided that handling kickstart file generation is also within its scope. So again Oz code in this area should go away long term.
That leaves the only bit of truely Oz specific code being that which customizes the images post-install to add further packages. So the quesiton is whether this is useful enough to apps to justify them using Oz.
I really see oVirt / OpenStack (and virt-manager, virt-install, GNOME Boxes, and any other virt management app) as wanting to use libosinfo directly for doing most of the work for VM provisioning and/or image building. Using Oz likely won't buy them a whole lot of extra benefit. I see Oz remaining as primarily a end user command line tool for building images
Regards, Daniel
There is also ImageFactory, which uses OZ.
The web site has step by step instructions for building and pushing. I've had success following them to build and push an f17 image to EC2. | |See the "ContactUs" link at the top for where/how to get help using it.
Yes. To be clear, while Oz is concerned with building images (or modifying existing JEOS images), Image Factory is concerned with getting images into the right place so you can actually use them. It understands the various workflows around pushing to RHEV, pushing to vSphere, pushing to OpenStack, and pushing to EC2 and has a nice ReST API for doing so.
Steven Hardy (of the Heat team) has been looking at using Factory to manage Heat's image-building needs so that they don't have to build stuff over and over again as they currently do.
Dan, if you have a minute to take a look at Factory's use of Oz and suggest ways to use libosinfo instead (as things progress), that would be outstanding...
--Hugh
Joe V.
<template> <name>f17jeos</name> <os> <rootpw>changeme</rootpw> <name>Fedora</name> <version>17</version> <arch>x86_64</arch> <install type='url'> <url>http://download.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora/linux/releases/17/Fedora/x86_64/os/</url> </install> </os> <description>Fedora 17</description> </template>
<provider_credentials> <ec2_credentials> <account_number>Your EC2 account number</account_number> <access_key>Your EC2 access key</access_key> <secret_access_key>Your EC2 secret key</secret_access_key> <certificate> -----BEGIN CERTIFICATE----- your EC2 certificate -----END CERTIFICATE----- </certificate> <key> -----BEGIN PRIVATE KEY----- your EC2 key -----END PRIVATE KEY----- </key> </ec2_credentials> </provider_credentials>
cloud mailing list cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud
-
Daniel P. Berrange -
Dave Neary -
Hugh O. Brock -
Joseph VLcek -
Matthew Miller