You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cloudstack.apache.org by Chip Childers <ch...@sungard.com> on 2013/06/01 19:35:06 UTC
[VOTE][RESULTS] Release Apache CloudStack 4.1.0 (fifth round)
The vote has *passed* with the following results (binding PMC votes
indicated with a "*" next to their name:
+1 : Edison*, Hugo*, Marcus*, David*, Wido*, Ilya, Animesh, Milamber,
Joe*, Simon, Prasanna*
-0 : John
-1 : Ove
I'm going to proceed with moving the release into the distribution repo
now, and will do the DEB / RPM builds to push Wido's repo site / push
cloudmonkey to pypi on Monday.
I do note Ove's -1, due to upstream Tomcat changes. I know Prasanna
mentioned that he was going to check with that project to see why the
change happened. We will need to discuss what (if anything) this
project should do to resolve the issue for users. This issue will block
users of all prior versions as well, so it's nothing *in* our code that
causes the bug. This is my logic for not cancelling the vote.
-chip
On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 09:47:40AM -0400, Chip Childers wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I've created a 4.1.0 release, with the following artifacts up for a
> vote.
>
> The changes from round 4 are related to DEB packaging, some
> translation strings, and a functional patch to make bridge type
> optional during the agent setup (for backward compatibility).
>
> Git Branch and Commit SH:
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/4.1
> Commit: a5214bee99f6c5582d755c9499f7d99fd7b5b701
>
> List of changes:
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=blob_plain;f=CHANGES;hb=4.1
>
> Source release (checksums and signatures are available at the same
> location):
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/cloudstack/4.1.0/
>
> PGP release keys (signed using A99A5D58):
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/cloudstack/KEYS
>
> Testing instructions are here:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Release+test+procedure
>
> Vote will be open for 72 hours.
>
> For sanity in tallying the vote, can PMC members please be sure to
> indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
>
> [ ] +1 approve
> [ ] +0 no opinion
> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
Re: [VOTE][RESULTS] Release Apache CloudStack 4.1.0 (fifth round)
Posted by Chip Childers <ch...@sungard.com>.
On Mon, Jun 03, 2013 at 06:40:55PM +0900, Hiroaki KAWAI wrote:
> I don't want to see NORMAL users getting failed with running
> cloudstack and sending email for asking the workaround.
> # Even if you're thinking we're not wrong.
>
> If you're going to release a5214bee99f6c5582d755c9499f7d99fd7b5b701
> as 4.1.0, I'd like to suggest releasing 4.1.1 asap.
>
> # I know the voting window has closed, but I'm -1 on releasing
> # 4.1.0 at this moment.
I replied to Prasanna's email on this issue with the path forward, and
apologize for moving forward without figuring out what a fix would be
for this.
We have to do a 4.1.1 to officially fix it. The hosted RPM's can
contain the fix, since they are not an official ASF artifact (and
therefore don't require VOTEing, etc...).
-chip
Re: [VOTE][RESULTS] Release Apache CloudStack 4.1.0 (fifth round)
Posted by Hiroaki KAWAI <ka...@stratosphere.co.jp>.
I don't want to see NORMAL users getting failed with running
cloudstack and sending email for asking the workaround.
# Even if you're thinking we're not wrong.
If you're going to release a5214bee99f6c5582d755c9499f7d99fd7b5b701
as 4.1.0, I'd like to suggest releasing 4.1.1 asap.
# I know the voting window has closed, but I'm -1 on releasing
# 4.1.0 at this moment.
(2013/06/02 2:35), Chip Childers wrote:
> The vote has *passed* with the following results (binding PMC votes
> indicated with a "*" next to their name:
>
> +1 : Edison*, Hugo*, Marcus*, David*, Wido*, Ilya, Animesh, Milamber,
> Joe*, Simon, Prasanna*
> -0 : John
> -1 : Ove
>
> I'm going to proceed with moving the release into the distribution repo
> now, and will do the DEB / RPM builds to push Wido's repo site / push
> cloudmonkey to pypi on Monday.
>
> I do note Ove's -1, due to upstream Tomcat changes. I know Prasanna
> mentioned that he was going to check with that project to see why the
> change happened. We will need to discuss what (if anything) this
> project should do to resolve the issue for users. This issue will block
> users of all prior versions as well, so it's nothing *in* our code that
> causes the bug. This is my logic for not cancelling the vote.
>
> -chip
>
> On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 09:47:40AM -0400, Chip Childers wrote:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> I've created a 4.1.0 release, with the following artifacts up for a
>> vote.
>>
>> The changes from round 4 are related to DEB packaging, some
>> translation strings, and a functional patch to make bridge type
>> optional during the agent setup (for backward compatibility).
>>
>> Git Branch and Commit SH:
>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/4.1
>> Commit: a5214bee99f6c5582d755c9499f7d99fd7b5b701
>>
>> List of changes:
>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=blob_plain;f=CHANGES;hb=4.1
>>
>> Source release (checksums and signatures are available at the same
>> location):
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/cloudstack/4.1.0/
>>
>> PGP release keys (signed using A99A5D58):
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/cloudstack/KEYS
>>
>> Testing instructions are here:
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Release+test+procedure
>>
>> Vote will be open for 72 hours.
>>
>> For sanity in tallying the vote, can PMC members please be sure to
>> indicate "(binding)" with their vote?
>>
>> [ ] +1 approve
>> [ ] +0 no opinion
>> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
Re: [VOTE][RESULTS] Release Apache CloudStack 4.1.0 (fifth round)
Posted by Hiroaki KAWAI <ka...@stratosphere.co.jp>.
(2013/06/06 14:24), Prasanna Santhanam wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 08:01:10AM +0900, Hiroaki KAWAI wrote:
>> It took time to investigate what's happening on Ubuntu.
>
> Thanks for taking the time to investigate!
>
>>
>> On Ubuntu, we don't have apparent problem with current setup.
>> We don't have to touch catalina.out simply because it is
>> not used.
>> # Cloudstack java stdout is sent to /dev/null.
>>
>> In tomcat6, java stdout,stderr is redirected to catalina.out
>> (in /usr/share/tomcat6/bin/catalina.sh)
>
> Does /usr/share/cloudstack-management/ link to /usr/share/tomcat6?
> This is the case with RPMs at least.
No direct symlink, some dirs under /usr/share/cloudstack-management
are linked to tomcat6's.
# By the way, as the source is open, you can see `ln -s` in
# debian/rules.
> In which case the permission
> should be for cloud:cloud and not tomcat:tomcat as the init script
> might have done?
log directory is linked to /var/log/cloudstack/management so
`tomcat` user does not play here.
>> So, the init script touches catalina.out before invoking
>> catalina.sh. Additionally, there's logrotate configuration
>> in tomcat6 package, which will be installed at
>> /etc/logrotate.d/tomcat6 during postinstall.
>>
>> IMHO, it is preferable to have our catalina.out, but
>> there's no need to fix it in haste.
>
> Yes this time we better test it before release or it's going to be
> embarassing to have a supported OS not work.
>
What I wanted to mean here, is "now catalina.out issues are
resolved. We're ready for 4.1.1"
# We should modify Ubuntu init script to have java's stdout,
# stderr redirected to catalina.out. But it is another issue.
Re: [VOTE][RESULTS] Release Apache CloudStack 4.1.0 (fifth round)
Posted by Prasanna Santhanam <ts...@apache.org>.
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 08:01:10AM +0900, Hiroaki KAWAI wrote:
> It took time to investigate what's happening on Ubuntu.
Thanks for taking the time to investigate!
>
> On Ubuntu, we don't have apparent problem with current setup.
> We don't have to touch catalina.out simply because it is
> not used.
> # Cloudstack java stdout is sent to /dev/null.
>
> In tomcat6, java stdout,stderr is redirected to catalina.out
> (in /usr/share/tomcat6/bin/catalina.sh)
Does /usr/share/cloudstack-management/ link to /usr/share/tomcat6?
This is the case with RPMs at least. In which case the permission
should be for cloud:cloud and not tomcat:tomcat as the init script
might have done?
> So, the init script touches catalina.out before invoking
> catalina.sh. Additionally, there's logrotate configuration
> in tomcat6 package, which will be installed at
> /etc/logrotate.d/tomcat6 during postinstall.
>
> IMHO, it is preferable to have our catalina.out, but
> there's no need to fix it in haste.
Yes this time we better test it before release or it's going to be
embarassing to have a supported OS not work.
--
Prasanna.,
------------------------
Powered by BigRock.com
Re: [VOTE][RESULTS] Release Apache CloudStack 4.1.0 (fifth round)
Posted by Hiroaki KAWAI <ka...@stratosphere.co.jp>.
It took time to investigate what's happening on Ubuntu.
On Ubuntu, we don't have apparent problem with current setup.
We don't have to touch catalina.out simply because it is
not used.
# Cloudstack java stdout is sent to /dev/null.
In tomcat6, java stdout,stderr is redirected to catalina.out
(in /usr/share/tomcat6/bin/catalina.sh)
So, the init script touches catalina.out before invoking
catalina.sh. Additionally, there's logrotate configuration
in tomcat6 package, which will be installed at
/etc/logrotate.d/tomcat6 during postinstall.
IMHO, it is preferable to have our catalina.out, but
there's no need to fix it in haste.
(2013/06/05 15:38), Hiroaki KAWAI wrote:
> Hum... interesting. In Ubuntu tomcat6, the catalina.out
> is handled in init script.
>
> 1. Download tomcat6_6.0.35-6.debian.tar.gz from
> http://packages.ubuntu.com/raring/tomcat6
> 2. untar it and look into the init script
> --------------------
> :
> touch "$CATALINA_PID" "$CATALINA_BASE"/logs/catalina.out
> chown $TOMCAT6_USER "$CATALINA_PID" "$CATALINA_BASE"/logs/catalina.out
> :
> --------------------
>
> I'd like to put a patch in reviewboard soon.
>
>
> (2013/06/04 14:49), Prasanna Santhanam wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 04, 2013 at 11:26:01AM +0900, Hiroaki KAWAI wrote:
>>> HI,
>>>
>>> I looked into tomcat6.spec file, the catalina.out
>>> stuff seems to be handled in rpm installation process.
>>> ------------------------
>>> %install
>>> :
>>> /bin/touch ${RPM_BUILD_ROOT}%{logdir}/catalina.out
>>> :
>>>
>>> %files
>>> :
>>> %attr(0644,tomcat,tomcat) %{logdir}/catalina.out
>>> :
>>> ------------------------
>>>
>>> So I'd like to suggest to do as such in our cloudstack spec file, too.
>>>
>>
>> Thanks, this is more elegant for RPMs. I'm trying the fix now. But the
>> hack I put in should work for debian packages too.
>>
>
Re: [VOTE][RESULTS] Release Apache CloudStack 4.1.0 (fifth round)
Posted by Prasanna Santhanam <ts...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Jun 05, 2013 at 03:38:17PM +0900, Hiroaki KAWAI wrote:
> Hum... interesting. In Ubuntu tomcat6, the catalina.out
> is handled in init script.
>
> 1. Download tomcat6_6.0.35-6.debian.tar.gz from
> http://packages.ubuntu.com/raring/tomcat6
> 2. untar it and look into the init script
> --------------------
> :
> touch "$CATALINA_PID" "$CATALINA_BASE"/logs/catalina.out
> chown $TOMCAT6_USER "$CATALINA_PID" "$CATALINA_BASE"/logs/catalina.out
> :
> --------------------
>
> I'd like to put a patch in reviewboard soon.
Pushed your RPM patch to master, please let Joe know when you fix DEBs
so he can spin a 4.1.1 VOTE.
commit 78196384ae905ddf01b1b2f76b9d397aa4117482
Author: Hiroaki KAWAI <ka...@stratosphere.co.jp>
Date: Tue Jun 4 12:41:09 2013 +0900
CLOUDSTACK-2758: touch file for tomcat6 package change CVS 2013-1976
catalina.out must be prepared by package installation.
Signed-off-by: Prasanna Santhanam <ts...@apache.org>
Thanks,
--
Prasanna.,
------------------------
Powered by BigRock.com
Re: [VOTE][RESULTS] Release Apache CloudStack 4.1.0 (fifth round)
Posted by Hiroaki KAWAI <ka...@stratosphere.co.jp>.
Hum... interesting. In Ubuntu tomcat6, the catalina.out
is handled in init script.
1. Download tomcat6_6.0.35-6.debian.tar.gz from
http://packages.ubuntu.com/raring/tomcat6
2. untar it and look into the init script
--------------------
:
touch "$CATALINA_PID" "$CATALINA_BASE"/logs/catalina.out
chown $TOMCAT6_USER "$CATALINA_PID" "$CATALINA_BASE"/logs/catalina.out
:
--------------------
I'd like to put a patch in reviewboard soon.
(2013/06/04 14:49), Prasanna Santhanam wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 04, 2013 at 11:26:01AM +0900, Hiroaki KAWAI wrote:
>> HI,
>>
>> I looked into tomcat6.spec file, the catalina.out
>> stuff seems to be handled in rpm installation process.
>> ------------------------
>> %install
>> :
>> /bin/touch ${RPM_BUILD_ROOT}%{logdir}/catalina.out
>> :
>>
>> %files
>> :
>> %attr(0644,tomcat,tomcat) %{logdir}/catalina.out
>> :
>> ------------------------
>>
>> So I'd like to suggest to do as such in our cloudstack spec file, too.
>>
>
> Thanks, this is more elegant for RPMs. I'm trying the fix now. But the
> hack I put in should work for debian packages too.
>
Re: [VOTE][RESULTS] Release Apache CloudStack 4.1.0 (fifth round)
Posted by John Burwell <jb...@basho.com>.
Joe,
To the best of my knowledge, we have not placed a size restriction on bug fixed for a minor release. As I understand our versioning policy, minor releases are scoped to non-interface breaking bug fixes. Time drift is a non-interface breaking bug, and it is a significant operational issue that should be fixed as soon as feasible. Admittedly, the test effort will be significant, but based on the previous conversation, the test plan is well understood. As such, fixing this defect appears to be within the scope of our versioning policy, and that it can be integrated and tested with an acceptable level of risk.
Seeing as user may be experiencing other system VM problems, it seems might be wise to take a step back for 4.1.1 and completely re-test images anyway. Would it be acceptable to test the 4.2 system VMs against 4.1 and based on the results, determine if/when they could be included in a 4.1 minor release?
Thanks,
-John
On Jun 5, 2013, at 10:42 AM, Joe Brockmeier <jz...@zonker.net> wrote:
> Hi John,
>
> On Tue, Jun 4, 2013, at 09:42 PM, John Burwell wrote:
>> I would like to get clock drift fixed for 4.1.1 as well. What needs
>> to be done to test the 4.2 system VMs? How can folks assist with the
>> testing process?
>
> I'd like to get it fixed as well. However, I think that updating system
> VMs is a pretty big leap for a point release. We might have an issue
> with the fix that has gone in so far for KVM:
>
> http://markmail.org/message/xoy2wn4ypxpdek4r
>
> (Note, I am not saying I'm happy about letting the issue sit until 4.2 -
> but I'm not sure that a fix that potentially disruptive should go into a
> point release.)
>
> Best,
>
> jzb
> --
> Joe Brockmeier
> jzb@zonker.net
> Twitter: @jzb
> http://www.dissociatedpress.net/
Re: [VOTE][RESULTS] Release Apache CloudStack 4.1.0 (fifth round)
Posted by Joe Brockmeier <jz...@zonker.net>.
On Wed, Jun 5, 2013, at 10:27 AM, Marcus Sorensen wrote:
> Ah, yes, I see on my test system that a version inadvertently got
> sucked in from a different repo. Sorry about that, I suppose we should
> pull that commit from 4.1.1?
Have we verified that it's definitely the problem? (It sounds like it,
but I'm double-checking...)
> I develop primarily on CentOS, and have this one system that I *was*
> using to sanity check ubuntu. It troubles me that we either don't have
> the test coverage to catch this on Ubuntu, or that everyone is using
> newer/modified versions, however that's probably a topic for a
> different thread.
Did you want to start that? :-)
Best,
jzb
--
Joe Brockmeier
jzb@zonker.net
Twitter: @jzb
http://www.dissociatedpress.net/
Re: [VOTE][RESULTS] Release Apache CloudStack 4.1.0 (fifth round)
Posted by Marcus Sorensen <sh...@gmail.com>.
Ah, yes, I see on my test system that a version inadvertently got
sucked in from a different repo. Sorry about that, I suppose we should
pull that commit from 4.1.1?
I develop primarily on CentOS, and have this one system that I *was*
using to sanity check ubuntu. It troubles me that we either don't have
the test coverage to catch this on Ubuntu, or that everyone is using
newer/modified versions, however that's probably a topic for a
different thread.
On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 9:05 AM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 11:00 AM, Marcus Sorensen <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Joe,
>> I don't normally follow the cloudstack-users list, but I tested
>> with ubuntu 12.04, and don't get that error. It would be a real shame
>> if nobody caught that during voting/testing, it would mean that nobody
>> used standard OSes to test the release. However, the user says he's
>> running 0.9.8, and on my installed 12.04 it gets 0.9.13. I don't
>> remember upgrading the version on this system.
>>
>
> Launchpad only chows 0.9.8 for Precise.
>
> https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/precise/+source/libvirt
>
> --David
Re: [VOTE][RESULTS] Release Apache CloudStack 4.1.0 (fifth round)
Posted by David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us>.
On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 11:00 AM, Marcus Sorensen <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Joe,
> I don't normally follow the cloudstack-users list, but I tested
> with ubuntu 12.04, and don't get that error. It would be a real shame
> if nobody caught that during voting/testing, it would mean that nobody
> used standard OSes to test the release. However, the user says he's
> running 0.9.8, and on my installed 12.04 it gets 0.9.13. I don't
> remember upgrading the version on this system.
>
Launchpad only chows 0.9.8 for Precise.
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/precise/+source/libvirt
--David
Re: [VOTE][RESULTS] Release Apache CloudStack 4.1.0 (fifth round)
Posted by Marcus Sorensen <sh...@gmail.com>.
Joe,
I don't normally follow the cloudstack-users list, but I tested
with ubuntu 12.04, and don't get that error. It would be a real shame
if nobody caught that during voting/testing, it would mean that nobody
used standard OSes to test the release. However, the user says he's
running 0.9.8, and on my installed 12.04 it gets 0.9.13. I don't
remember upgrading the version on this system.
On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 8:42 AM, Joe Brockmeier <jz...@zonker.net> wrote:
> Hi John,
>
> On Tue, Jun 4, 2013, at 09:42 PM, John Burwell wrote:
>> I would like to get clock drift fixed for 4.1.1 as well. What needs
>> to be done to test the 4.2 system VMs? How can folks assist with the
>> testing process?
>
> I'd like to get it fixed as well. However, I think that updating system
> VMs is a pretty big leap for a point release. We might have an issue
> with the fix that has gone in so far for KVM:
>
> http://markmail.org/message/xoy2wn4ypxpdek4r
>
> (Note, I am not saying I'm happy about letting the issue sit until 4.2 -
> but I'm not sure that a fix that potentially disruptive should go into a
> point release.)
>
> Best,
>
> jzb
> --
> Joe Brockmeier
> jzb@zonker.net
> Twitter: @jzb
> http://www.dissociatedpress.net/
Re: [VOTE][RESULTS] Release Apache CloudStack 4.1.0 (fifth round)
Posted by Joe Brockmeier <jz...@zonker.net>.
Hi John,
On Tue, Jun 4, 2013, at 09:42 PM, John Burwell wrote:
> I would like to get clock drift fixed for 4.1.1 as well. What needs
> to be done to test the 4.2 system VMs? How can folks assist with the
> testing process?
I'd like to get it fixed as well. However, I think that updating system
VMs is a pretty big leap for a point release. We might have an issue
with the fix that has gone in so far for KVM:
http://markmail.org/message/xoy2wn4ypxpdek4r
(Note, I am not saying I'm happy about letting the issue sit until 4.2 -
but I'm not sure that a fix that potentially disruptive should go into a
point release.)
Best,
jzb
--
Joe Brockmeier
jzb@zonker.net
Twitter: @jzb
http://www.dissociatedpress.net/
Re: [VOTE][RESULTS] Release Apache CloudStack 4.1.0 (fifth round)
Posted by John Burwell <jb...@basho.com>.
Joe,
I would like to get clock drift fixed for 4.1.1 as well. What needs
to be done to test the 4.2 system VMs? How can folks assist with the
testing process?
Thanks,
-Jojn
On Jun 4, 2013, at 10:17 PM, Joe Brockmeier <jz...@zonker.net> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 4, 2013, at 12:49 AM, Prasanna Santhanam wrote:
>> Thanks, this is more elegant for RPMs. I'm trying the fix now. But the
>> hack I put in should work for debian packages too.
>
> Are we sure on this? If the fix is good for 4.1.1, we can respin and
> start the VOTE Wednesday.z
>
> Best,
>
> jzb
> --
> Joe Brockmeier
> jzb@zonker.net
> Twitter: @jzb
> http://www.dissociatedpress.net/
Re: [VOTE][RESULTS] Release Apache CloudStack 4.1.0 (fifth round)
Posted by Prasanna Santhanam <ts...@apache.org>.
On Tue, Jun 04, 2013 at 09:16:29PM -0500, Joe Brockmeier wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 4, 2013, at 12:49 AM, Prasanna Santhanam wrote:
> > Thanks, this is more elegant for RPMs. I'm trying the fix now. But the
> > hack I put in should work for debian packages too.
>
> Are we sure on this? If the fix is good for 4.1.1, we can respin and
> start the VOTE Wednesday.z
>
Joe, someone has to fix this for debian systems. I'm not too familiar
with the packaging for debian.
Kawai-san, can you please push your fix to master and give Joe the
commit-SHA?
Once these two are in, we can spin the VOTE again.
--
Prasanna.,
------------------------
Powered by BigRock.com
Re: [VOTE][RESULTS] Release Apache CloudStack 4.1.0 (fifth round)
Posted by Joe Brockmeier <jz...@zonker.net>.
On Tue, Jun 4, 2013, at 12:49 AM, Prasanna Santhanam wrote:
> Thanks, this is more elegant for RPMs. I'm trying the fix now. But the
> hack I put in should work for debian packages too.
Are we sure on this? If the fix is good for 4.1.1, we can respin and
start the VOTE Wednesday.z
Best,
jzb
--
Joe Brockmeier
jzb@zonker.net
Twitter: @jzb
http://www.dissociatedpress.net/
Re: [VOTE][RESULTS] Release Apache CloudStack 4.1.0 (fifth round)
Posted by Prasanna Santhanam <ts...@apache.org>.
On Tue, Jun 04, 2013 at 11:26:01AM +0900, Hiroaki KAWAI wrote:
> HI,
>
> I looked into tomcat6.spec file, the catalina.out
> stuff seems to be handled in rpm installation process.
> ------------------------
> %install
> :
> /bin/touch ${RPM_BUILD_ROOT}%{logdir}/catalina.out
> :
>
> %files
> :
> %attr(0644,tomcat,tomcat) %{logdir}/catalina.out
> :
> ------------------------
>
> So I'd like to suggest to do as such in our cloudstack spec file, too.
>
Thanks, this is more elegant for RPMs. I'm trying the fix now. But the
hack I put in should work for debian packages too.
--
Prasanna.,
------------------------
Powered by BigRock.com
Re: [VOTE][RESULTS] Release Apache CloudStack 4.1.0 (fifth round)
Posted by Hiroaki KAWAI <ka...@stratosphere.co.jp>.
HI,
I looked into tomcat6.spec file, the catalina.out
stuff seems to be handled in rpm installation process.
------------------------
%install
:
/bin/touch ${RPM_BUILD_ROOT}%{logdir}/catalina.out
:
%files
:
%attr(0644,tomcat,tomcat) %{logdir}/catalina.out
:
------------------------
So I'd like to suggest to do as such in our cloudstack spec file, too.
(2013/06/03 19:10), Prasanna Santhanam wrote:
> I couldn't find a reasonably good solution for this. The vulnerability
> is fixed in Tomcat more than a year ago and it was applied only
> recently, as Ove pointed, in the distros. While this doesn't affect
> those upgrading, it is problematic for those installing CloudStack
> afresh. Any version - 3.0.2, ($insert_commercial_version), 4.0,
> 4.0.1, 4.0.2, 4.1 and even the 4.2-SNAPSHOT RPMs.
>
> I've applied a fix on master (54127f8) that I think is reasonable by
> changing the permissions on the file so it is owned by user `cloud`
> which is the user cloudstack-management will run as. To understand why
> this is not an obvious hack please see [1]. If there's an even elegant
> way, please let the list know.
>
> I'm also not quite sure how and when the deb packages will be
> affected. It looked like the debian users haven't reported this
> problem yet. We started seeing issues of this right after May 25th,
> should've paid more attention then (/me facepalm)
>
> It's an awkward situation, so I'm not sure what will be the next
> course of action since our src release is ready to be published.
>
> The options are:
> a) Publish workaround of giving `cloud` permissions to catalina.out
> b) Release a new source package with fix cherry-picked to 4.1 and
> whereever applicable.
>
> b. shouldn't take longer - just testing the packaging should be
> sufficient. CloudStack's overall functionality is satisfactory from
> the tests done so far.
>
> [1] http://markmail.org/thread/wuknrv3ml5lfdq7c
>
Re: [VOTE][RESULTS] Release Apache CloudStack 4.1.0 (fifth round)
Posted by Joe Brockmeier <jz...@zonker.net>.
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013, at 08:39 AM, Chip Childers wrote:
> 2) Someone (not me, due to vacation starting Wed) needs to spin a 4.1.1
> release
> ASAP to include the fix for this.
I'm happy to help get this together if Ilya needs any assistance. I'm
flying today but will be around tomorrow and Wednesday.
Best,
jzb
--
Joe Brockmeier
jzb@zonker.net
Twitter: @jzb
http://www.dissociatedpress.net/
Re: [VOTE][RESULTS] Release Apache CloudStack 4.1.0 (fifth round)
Posted by Chip Childers <ch...@sungard.com>.
On Mon, Jun 03, 2013 at 03:40:04PM +0530, Prasanna Santhanam wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 01, 2013 at 01:35:06PM -0400, Chip Childers wrote:
> > The vote has *passed* with the following results (binding PMC votes
> > indicated with a "*" next to their name:
> >
> > +1 : Edison*, Hugo*, Marcus*, David*, Wido*, Ilya, Animesh, Milamber,
> > Joe*, Simon, Prasanna*
> > -0 : John
> > -1 : Ove
> >
> > I'm going to proceed with moving the release into the distribution repo
> > now, and will do the DEB / RPM builds to push Wido's repo site / push
> > cloudmonkey to pypi on Monday.
> >
> > I do note Ove's -1, due to upstream Tomcat changes. I know Prasanna
> > mentioned that he was going to check with that project to see why the
> > change happened. We will need to discuss what (if anything) this
> > project should do to resolve the issue for users. This issue will block
> > users of all prior versions as well, so it's nothing *in* our code that
> > causes the bug. This is my logic for not cancelling the vote.
> >
>
> I couldn't find a reasonably good solution for this. The vulnerability
> is fixed in Tomcat more than a year ago and it was applied only
> recently, as Ove pointed, in the distros. While this doesn't affect
> those upgrading, it is problematic for those installing CloudStack
> afresh. Any version - 3.0.2, ($insert_commercial_version), 4.0,
> 4.0.1, 4.0.2, 4.1 and even the 4.2-SNAPSHOT RPMs.
>
> I've applied a fix on master (54127f8) that I think is reasonable by
> changing the permissions on the file so it is owned by user `cloud`
> which is the user cloudstack-management will run as. To understand why
> this is not an obvious hack please see [1]. If there's an even elegant
> way, please let the list know.
This seems like a reasonable fix to me. I'll cherry-pick it over to
4.0.
>
> I'm also not quite sure how and when the deb packages will be
> affected. It looked like the debian users haven't reported this
> problem yet. We started seeing issues of this right after May 25th,
> should've paid more attention then (/me facepalm)
CLOUDSTACK-2758 should probably stay open, pending a DEB fix to pre-empt
the issue occurring in those distros.
>
> It's an awkward situation, so I'm not sure what will be the next
> course of action since our src release is ready to be published.
>
> The options are:
> a) Publish workaround of giving `cloud` permissions to catalina.out
> b) Release a new source package with fix cherry-picked to 4.1 and
> whereever applicable.
>
> b. shouldn't take longer - just testing the packaging should be
> sufficient. CloudStack's overall functionality is satisfactory from
> the tests done so far.
Unfortunately, perhaps I made a big mistake by not cancelling the VOTE
and performing the release copy. At this point, 4.0.0 is *frozen* from
changes per ASF release policies (we can't change the bits after I put
them in the release dir).
So... I'm actually going to propose 2 things:
1) I'm going to build the RPM's that we'll host from Wido's repo server
*with* the fix Prasanna provided.
2) Someone (not me, due to vacation starting Wed) needs to spin a 4.1.1 release
ASAP to include the fix for this.
>
> [1] http://markmail.org/thread/wuknrv3ml5lfdq7c
>
> --
> Prasanna.,
>
> ------------------------
> Powered by BigRock.com
>
>
Re: [VOTE][RESULTS] Release Apache CloudStack 4.1.0 (fifth round)
Posted by Prasanna Santhanam <ts...@apache.org>.
On Sat, Jun 01, 2013 at 01:35:06PM -0400, Chip Childers wrote:
> The vote has *passed* with the following results (binding PMC votes
> indicated with a "*" next to their name:
>
> +1 : Edison*, Hugo*, Marcus*, David*, Wido*, Ilya, Animesh, Milamber,
> Joe*, Simon, Prasanna*
> -0 : John
> -1 : Ove
>
> I'm going to proceed with moving the release into the distribution repo
> now, and will do the DEB / RPM builds to push Wido's repo site / push
> cloudmonkey to pypi on Monday.
>
> I do note Ove's -1, due to upstream Tomcat changes. I know Prasanna
> mentioned that he was going to check with that project to see why the
> change happened. We will need to discuss what (if anything) this
> project should do to resolve the issue for users. This issue will block
> users of all prior versions as well, so it's nothing *in* our code that
> causes the bug. This is my logic for not cancelling the vote.
>
I couldn't find a reasonably good solution for this. The vulnerability
is fixed in Tomcat more than a year ago and it was applied only
recently, as Ove pointed, in the distros. While this doesn't affect
those upgrading, it is problematic for those installing CloudStack
afresh. Any version - 3.0.2, ($insert_commercial_version), 4.0,
4.0.1, 4.0.2, 4.1 and even the 4.2-SNAPSHOT RPMs.
I've applied a fix on master (54127f8) that I think is reasonable by
changing the permissions on the file so it is owned by user `cloud`
which is the user cloudstack-management will run as. To understand why
this is not an obvious hack please see [1]. If there's an even elegant
way, please let the list know.
I'm also not quite sure how and when the deb packages will be
affected. It looked like the debian users haven't reported this
problem yet. We started seeing issues of this right after May 25th,
should've paid more attention then (/me facepalm)
It's an awkward situation, so I'm not sure what will be the next
course of action since our src release is ready to be published.
The options are:
a) Publish workaround of giving `cloud` permissions to catalina.out
b) Release a new source package with fix cherry-picked to 4.1 and
whereever applicable.
b. shouldn't take longer - just testing the packaging should be
sufficient. CloudStack's overall functionality is satisfactory from
the tests done so far.
[1] http://markmail.org/thread/wuknrv3ml5lfdq7c
--
Prasanna.,
------------------------
Powered by BigRock.com