[Starlingx-discuss] [Containers] Package Requirements on the bare-metal controller-0

Curtis serverascode at gmail.com
Fri Feb 15 18:13:56 UTC 2019


On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 1:00 PM Rowsell, Brent <Brent.Rowsell at windriver.com>
wrote:

> See inline
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Curtis [mailto:serverascode at gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Friday, February 15, 2019 11:30 AM
> *To:* Rowsell, Brent <Brent.Rowsell at windriver.com>
> *Cc:* Penney, Don <Don.Penney at windriver.com>; Saul Wold <
> sgw at linux.intel.com>; starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io
> *Subject:* Re: [Starlingx-discuss] [Containers] Package Requirements on
> the bare-metal controller-0
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 10:42 AM Rowsell, Brent <
> Brent.Rowsell at windriver.com> wrote:
>
> A few points to keep in mind here:
>
> 1)      Config_controller is being removed and replaced with ansible.
>
> 2)      Openstack deployment will not be part of the initial controller
> bootstrapping. Openstack will be deployed in containers.
>
> 3)      We are in the process of moving to vanilla openstack.
>
>
>
> With those points in mind, does that mean after moving to vanilla
> openstack the keystone code will come from an upstream RPM?
>
> [BR] Since we will be doing CI with openstack master, we will be building
> our own rpm’s.  The upstream centos distro would only have release rpm’s
> (i.e. rocky).
>
>
>

OK thanks for the answer. Interesting.

Thanks,
Curtis



> Thanks,
>
> Curtis
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Brent
>
>
>
> *From:* Curtis [mailto:serverascode at gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Friday, February 15, 2019 10:19 AM
> *To:* Penney, Don <Don.Penney at windriver.com>
> *Cc:* Saul Wold <sgw at linux.intel.com>;
> starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io
> *Subject:* Re: [Starlingx-discuss] [Containers] Package Requirements on
> the bare-metal controller-0
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 10:12 AM Penney, Don <Don.Penney at windriver.com>
> wrote:
>
> Comments inline.
>
>
>
> *From:* Curtis [mailto:serverascode at gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Friday, February 15, 2019 8:24 AM
> *To:* Saul Wold
> *Cc:* starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io
> *Subject:* Re: [Starlingx-discuss] [Containers] Package Requirements on
> the bare-metal controller-0
>
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 12:51 PM Saul Wold <sgw at linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
>
> Folks,
>
> I was doing some experimentation with an un-patched CentOS and running
> config_controller. One of the main issues I found is that doing the
> initial installation and execution discovered many un-resolved runtime
> requirements.
>
>
>
> Thanks for looking into this Saul, I think this is a good thing to do to
> work towards getting a understanding of dependencies.
>
>  [BR] Keep in mind config_controller is being removed and being replaced
> with ansible. The bootsta
>
>
> I will start sending some pull requests to fault, metal, and config with
> more detailed "Requires:" statements.
>
> Another item is that since that we are rebuilding openstack-keystone
> among other openstack related packages with additional configuration and
> scripts, which are needed for controller-0. In the stx-integ (base OS)
> case, we re-factored many of the packages to remove configuration and
> additional scripts to a separate package, I would like to see something
> similar here for packages are are needed for controller-0 (ie the things
> we are not installing from PyPi directly).
>
>
>
> Do we install things directly from PyPi? When does that happen?
>
> *[Don] No, we don’t install anything from PyPi.*
>
>
>
> Thanks. Good to know. :)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> What I saw is that we include the CentOS-Openstack RPM repo along with,
> of course, our StarlingX RPM repo. Why can't we use the CentOS-Openstack
> packages directly along with some StarlingX specific additions in a
> seperate package, rather than creating a new package with both upstream
> and StarlingX content.
>
>
>
> I don't know what the extra things are that we are packaging, but if they
> are only helper scripts and the like and don't affect the actual keystone
> code then I'd hope we would use the upstream RPMs.
>
> *[Don] As much as possible, we look to use unmodified upstream RPMs.*
>
>
>
> Can you expand on that statement in the context of this particular RPM?
> (Sorry I'm not familiar with what we are doing with Keystone.)
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Curtis
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> My two cents. :)
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Curtis
>
>
>
>
>
> Thoughts,
>
> Sau!
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Starlingx-discuss mailing list
> Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io
> http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss
>
>
>
> --
>
> Blog: serverascode.com
>
>
>
> --
>
> Blog: serverascode.com
>
>
>
> --
>
> Blog: serverascode.com
>


-- 
Blog: serverascode.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.starlingx.io/pipermail/starlingx-discuss/attachments/20190215/1d381e0f/attachment.html>


More information about the Starlingx-discuss mailing list