Does the RPM section of this post make sense to you guys?
http://www.slicehost.com/articles/2010/3/1/32-bit-images-now-available#comme...
Seth has already made a comment, thought I'd get more eyes on it.
-Mike
On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 1:17 PM, Mike McGrath mmcgrath@redhat.com wrote:
Does the RPM section of this post make sense to you guys?
http://www.slicehost.com/articles/2010/3/1/32-bit-images-now-available#comme...
Seth has already made a comment, thought I'd get more eyes on it.
-Mike
cloud mailing list cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud
Yeah, I don't know where they got that from and I don't entirely understand their issue. Since Fedora 9 (that's as far back as I remember it being flawless) I've had great success with things like what I assume they are trying to do.
-AdamM
On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 12:28 PM, Adam Miller maxamillion@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 1:17 PM, Mike McGrath mmcgrath@redhat.com wrote:
Does the RPM section of this post make sense to you guys?
http://www.slicehost.com/articles/2010/3/1/32-bit-images-now-available#comme...
Seth has already made a comment, thought I'd get more eyes on it.
-Mike
cloud mailing list cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud
Yeah, I don't know where they got that from and I don't entirely understand their issue. Since Fedora 9 (that's as far back as I remember it being flawless) I've had great success with things like what I assume they are trying to do.
-AdamM
Ok if I am understanding this correctly.. the slicehost may not be a virtual machine but a virtual protected system. In this case, they are not running a seperate VT but one of the other ways of doing things. So a pure 32 bit environment is not what they want but a mixed 64/32 bit environment.. with more stuff being 32 bit enabled.
Again this is me sort of understanding what they are talking about...
Seth has graciously offered to review our offerings and give us a hand if we run into problems. I've been talking with him today in detail and I may have narrowed it down to an issue outside of the Fedora/CentOS distributions themselves.
jforbes pointed me to the Fedora Cloud SIG group today - I wasn't aware of it before. I work at Rackspace in a systems operations role within the Slicehost/Cloud Servers group. As I discussed with Seth, I'm one of the biggest proponents of Fedora, CentOS and Red Hat within the Cloud segment and I look forward to working more with members of your team!
-- Major Hayden major.hayden@rackspace.com
On Mar 2, 2010, at 16:21, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 12:28 PM, Adam Miller maxamillion@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 1:17 PM, Mike McGrath mmcgrath@redhat.com wrote:
Does the RPM section of this post make sense to you guys?
http://www.slicehost.com/articles/2010/3/1/32-bit-images-now-available#comme...
Seth has already made a comment, thought I'd get more eyes on it.
-Mike
cloud mailing list cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud
Yeah, I don't know where they got that from and I don't entirely understand their issue. Since Fedora 9 (that's as far back as I remember it being flawless) I've had great success with things like what I assume they are trying to do.
-AdamM
Ok if I am understanding this correctly.. the slicehost may not be a virtual machine but a virtual protected system. In this case, they are not running a seperate VT but one of the other ways of doing things. So a pure 32 bit environment is not what they want but a mixed 64/32 bit environment.. with more stuff being 32 bit enabled.
Again this is me sort of understanding what they are talking about...
-- Stephen J Smoogen.
Ah, but a man's reach should exceed his grasp. Or what's a heaven for? -- Robert Browning _______________________________________________ cloud mailing list cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud
Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message (including any attached or embedded documents) is intended for the exclusive and confidential use of the individual or entity to which this message is addressed, and unless otherwise expressly indicated, is confidential and privileged information of Rackspace. Any dissemination, distribution or copying of the enclosed material is prohibited. If you receive this transmission in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail at abuse@rackspace.com, and delete the original message. Your cooperation is appreciated.
On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 8:26 PM, Major Hayden major.hayden@rackspace.com wrote:
Seth has graciously offered to review our offerings and give us a hand if we run into problems. I've been talking with him today in detail and I may have narrowed it down to an issue outside of the Fedora/CentOS distributions themselves.
jforbes pointed me to the Fedora Cloud SIG group today - I wasn't aware of it before. I work at Rackspace in a systems operations role within the Slicehost/Cloud Servers group. As I discussed with Seth, I'm one of the biggest proponents of Fedora, CentOS and Red Hat within the Cloud segment and I look forward to working more with members of your team!
-- Major Hayden major.hayden@rackspace.com
Cool. As a customer and a Fedora person, I would love to help you on this.
Thanks, Stephen! I have a CentOS 5.4 32-bit image in testing that Seth has reviewed. It appears to be working well with our latest three kernels, and I haven't found any problems while setting up some basic services (apache, mysql, php, etc).
Seth and I have been emailing back and forth regarding 32-bit Fedora and the issue that os.uname() returns x86_64. He made the point that $basearch/$arch in the yum configs would be set to x86_64, which would cause yum to pull 64-bit packages for Fedora from then on. I thought the /etc/rpm/platform fix would help (as it did in CentOS), but that's ignored with yum in Fedora.
Using pvgrub would eliminate this problem, but that requires a significant developer contribution on our end to bring our automation tools up to speed. I've built a few 32-bit kernels from Ubuntu's sources as well as upstream kernel.org sources and I've had kernel panics inside the domU that I cannot resolve.
-- Major Hayden
On Mar 2, 2010, at 23:23, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 8:26 PM, Major Hayden major.hayden@rackspace.com wrote:
Seth has graciously offered to review our offerings and give us a hand if we run into problems. I've been talking with him today in detail and I may have narrowed it down to an issue outside of the Fedora/CentOS distributions themselves.
jforbes pointed me to the Fedora Cloud SIG group today - I wasn't aware of it before. I work at Rackspace in a systems operations role within the Slicehost/Cloud Servers group. As I discussed with Seth, I'm one of the biggest proponents of Fedora, CentOS and Red Hat within the Cloud segment and I look forward to working more with members of your team!
-- Major Hayden major.hayden@rackspace.com
Cool. As a customer and a Fedora person, I would love to help you on this.
-- Stephen J Smoogen.
Ah, but a man's reach should exceed his grasp. Or what's a heaven for? -- Robert Browning _______________________________________________ cloud mailing list cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud
Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message (including any attached or embedded documents) is intended for the exclusive and confidential use of the individual or entity to which this message is addressed, and unless otherwise expressly indicated, is confidential and privileged information of Rackspace. Any dissemination, distribution or copying of the enclosed material is prohibited. If you receive this transmission in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail at abuse@rackspace.com, and delete the original message. Your cooperation is appreciated.
On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 3:21 PM, Stephen John Smoogen smooge@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 12:28 PM, Adam Miller maxamillion@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 1:17 PM, Mike McGrath mmcgrath@redhat.com wrote:
Does the RPM section of this post make sense to you guys?
http://www.slicehost.com/articles/2010/3/1/32-bit-images-now-available#comme...
Seth has already made a comment, thought I'd get more eyes on it.
-Mike
cloud mailing list cloud@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud
Yeah, I don't know where they got that from and I don't entirely understand their issue. Since Fedora 9 (that's as far back as I remember it being flawless) I've had great success with things like what I assume they are trying to do.
-AdamM
Ok if I am understanding this correctly.. the slicehost may not be a virtual machine but a virtual protected system. In this case, they are not running a seperate VT but one of the other ways of doing things. So a pure 32 bit environment is not what they want but a mixed 64/32 bit environment.. with more stuff being 32 bit enabled.
Again this is me sort of understanding what they are talking about...
Ok turns out i did not understand at all :). Onto learning more.
-
Adam Miller -
Major Hayden -
Mike McGrath -
Stephen John Smoogen