[ovs-dev] [PATCH 4/6] vagrant: Override box for libvirt provider.

Andy Zhou azhou at ovn.org
Mon Jun 6 21:02:22 UTC 2016


On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 7:07 PM, Joe Stringer <joe at ovn.org> wrote:

> On 23 May 2016 at 16:30, Andy Zhou <azhou at ovn.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 11:49 AM, Joe Stringer <joe at ovn.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> The default vagrant box for fedora23 uses the images provided by Chef's
> >> "bento" project, which has support for 3 backend providers: parallels,
> >> virtualbox and vmware. However, they do not build boxes for the libvirt
> >> backend.
> >>
> >> Introduce an override for the box to use the official fedora project box
> >> if trying to use the libvirt provider.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Joe Stringer <joe at ovn.org>
> >> ---
> >>  Vagrantfile | 3 +++
> >>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/Vagrantfile b/Vagrantfile
> >> index 4f2e0fdb7c48..dab03de56fac 100644
> >> --- a/Vagrantfile
> >> +++ b/Vagrantfile
> >> @@ -56,6 +56,9 @@ SCRIPT
> >>  Vagrant.configure(VAGRANTFILE_API_VERSION) do |config|
> >>    config.vm.define "fedora-23" do |fedora|
> >>         fedora.vm.box = "bento/fedora-23"
> >> +       fedora.vm.provider :"libvirt" do |lv, override|
> >> +           override.vm.box = "fedora/23-cloud-base"
> >> +       end
> >
> > Libvirt support is not currently documented on the Vagrant web site.
> > It may be nice to add a bit more document, and perhaps add links that
> have
> > the relavent information.
> >
> > On the other hand, do we need to support all those types of providers
> (and
> > therefore different Linux images?)
> > It may be nicer to support one of them well. I'd vote for libvirt
> provided
> > that we can fix the documentation issues
> > mentioned above.  What do you think?
>
> Today if someone only has the libvirt provider, they can't use the OVS
> Vagrantfile at all. The thought with this was it would allow them to
> do this, but without any implied support for any particular provider.
> However, I've got the VirtualBox provider working now so I don't care
> to push for inclusion of this patch. I agree that it's not great to
> use diverging images for multiple platforms, so it's probably simpler
> to leave everything as-is.
>
O.K. for me. Thanks for the updates.



More information about the dev mailing list