On Thu, 2012-02-09 at 07:06 -0800, Li, David wrote:
Mike,
I added adminpw as a kernel option. After boot, I tried "admin/abc123" and "root/abc123" but not able to login. Any idea?
Are there any errors in your build or boot logs? Mike
David
-----Original Message----- From: Mike Burns [mailto:mburns@redhat.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2012 6:53 PM To: Li, David Cc: Perry Myers; users@ovirt.org Subject: Re: [Users] Pxeboot
On Wed, 2012-02-08 at 17:11 -0800, Li, David wrote:
Ok, I built an iso out of archipel and pxebooted it with stateless option. Now I got a "localhost" login prompt. Any idea what should I put in as user/pwd? David
You will need to pass a password in on the command line as well
adminpw=<hashed_password>
You can generate the hashed password using:
$ openssl passwd
Assuming the password was abc123
$ openssl passwd abc123 tKrQfufCbosr6
adminpw=tKrQfufCbosr6
Mike
-----Original Message----- From: Mike Burns [mailto:mburns@redhat.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2012 4:31 PM To: Li, David Cc: Perry Myers; users@ovirt.org Subject: RE: [Users] Pxeboot
On Wed, 2012-02-08 at 15:43 -0800, Li, David wrote:
Ok, I think we are on the same page now regarding stateless node. It looks like the achipel diff you just pulled in might be able to do this. But I can't quite make it out what the kernel option should be. Is it "stateless=1"?
stateless=1 or just stateless, both will work.
David
-----Original Message----- From: Mike Burns [mailto:mburns@redhat.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2012 3:27 PM To: Li, David Cc: Perry Myers; users@ovirt.org Subject: Re: [Users] Pxeboot
On Wed, 2012-02-08 at 15:19 -0800, Li, David wrote: > Perry, > > I am glad you brought this up. > I 'd be perfectly happy to run the root fs entirely in RAM. In > fact that would be ideal for me. It's just I am not quite sure how to use pxeboot to achieve this. > > I am doing a test now using the tftpboot files created from the iso. > As far as I see, the kernel boot options (pxelinux.cfg/default) has: > > root=live:/ovirt-node-image-2.2.2-1.1.fc16.iso > > With this I can only pxeboot to the intall screen. What should > I use to let the kernel mount the root fs in memory? Something like root=/dev/ram0? > > David
It's not currently possible with ovirt-node. That's the whole stateless feature that we outlined. Once we actually have it implemented, it will be something along the lines of adding "stateless" to the kernel commandline.
Mike > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: Perry Myers [mailto:pmyers@redhat.com] > >Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2012 2:54 PM > >To: Mike Burns > >Cc: Li, David; users@ovirt.org > >Subject: Re: [Users] Pxeboot > > > >On 02/08/2012 05:03 PM, Mike Burns wrote: > >> On Wed, 2012-02-08 at 13:46 -0800, Li, David wrote: > >>> Mike, > >>> > >>> If I understand this correctly, today I should be able to > >>> pxeboot and nfs mount the root fs from a remote server. > >>> Apart from setting up the pxe stuff, I 'd have to populate > >>> the ovirt node root fs on the server > >>> - perhaps steal it from a disk install. In other words I am > >>> concerned about the point from which the kernel starts to > >>> execute /init script (in the initramfs) to the point /init > >>> is able to mount the final root fs from a remote server. > >> > >> No, there is no way to set this up currently in ovirt-node. > >> You could install using a remote iscsi lun if you have a > >> hardware iscsi HBA, but there isn't a way to mount a remote > >> nfs share as the root fs. > >> > >> Supporting a remote NFS share as the root fs isn't even > >> something that requested as an RFE at this point or on the > >> roadmap as far as I'm aware. > >> > >> It sounds like what you're really looking for is a shared > >> root fs that multiple hosts could use. This is something > >> that we will probably look into eventually, but it's not on > >> the immediate roadmap. > > > >Given that the rootfs of oVirt Node is fairly small and in a > >truly stateless environment would just run out of system RAM, > >there's no real reason to try to do a shared NFS based rootfs. > >It's an unnecessary complication I think, if the end goal is to > >move to truly stateless. > > > >For larger systems where the rootfs is on the order of GB's, > >shared root may make more sense. > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > Users@ovirt.org > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
_______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
_______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users