On 10/06/14 12:21 PM, Lars Kurth wrote: > Hi all, > > following the discussion on about documentation, I was wondering whether > we need to look at a standard way in which we recommend how to provision > images for VMs. Am starting this with a Xen hat, but the discussion > should not be specific to this. There are a number of options, but all > have some trade-offs > > == #1 virt-install == > > Advantages: similar to KVM > > Disadvantages: may cause weird issues / confusion with people switching > back to xl. The core issue is that with the current version of xen and > libvirt, this only works with xm (when xl is used, this can create some > undefined behavior). However as we have seen in some recent threads on > this list, people tend to mix which can cause problems. > > == #2 xen-tools == > > Advantages: Very flexible. Many other distros use xen-tools, so we have > lots of beginners docs that just need to be tweaked > > Disadvantages: needs porting/packaging for CentOS. Does not work for > kvm. Says "xen". (Maybe that's an advantage.) > We know that xen-tools works with Fedora (see > http://blog.xen.org/index.php/2013/01/24/using-xen-tools-on-fedora/), so > the porting effort may be small > > Unknowns: What would be needed to make it work for CentOS > > == #3 virt-builder (http://libguestfs.org/virt-builder.1.html) == > > Advantages: supports KVM, Xen and other VM inages. Seems easy to use. > - if so, it would avoid xm / xl confusion. > > Unknowns: Not sure at which level virt-builder integrates with Xen and > other hypervisors. It seems to operate at disk image format (similar to > xen-tools) . I don't know whether virt-builder is restricted to some > hypervisors in RHEL7. > > Disadvantages: may need porting/packaging for CentOS. It appears as if > it will be in RHEL7, so it may just appear with CentOS 7. If not, some > porting work may need to be done. > > == #4 Cloud Image from Cloud Image SIG == > We could rely on pre-built cloud images from the Cloud Images SIG. > People could just download the cloud image once it's done and customize > it, rather than installing / building their own. > > Advantages: seems easy > > Disadvantages: coordination with Cloud Images SIG. May not be flexible > enough > > I just wanted to start a discussion about this and ask for input. This > topic which has come up a number of times in SIG meetings as a facgtor > influencing libvirt and other package versions. > > Regards > Lars I would recommend the default be the libvirtd tools, as it tries to be hypervisor-agnostic, so it's most portable. Also, it provides a good amount of flexibility for various install type, where images/docker is more restricted. Again, speaking about defaults/generalities. I would, of course, point to the other tools so that users know what exists and what might work best for their use case. -- Digimer Papers and Projects: https://alteeve.ca/w/ What if the cure for cancer is trapped in the mind of a person without access to education? _______________________________________________ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@xxxxxxxxxx http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
