LXD polish for xenial

[Nate Finch]

Thanks for explaining, John, that makes sense and really helps me
understand the reasoning behind these changes.

On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 11:30 PM John Meinel <john at arbash-meinel.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 6:56 PM, Nate Finch <nate.finch at canonical.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Then I guess I don't understand why it worked fine up until last week.
>>
>
> So up until last week LXD depended on the 'lxc1' package which was the old
> tools for creating containers. That did always set up an 'lxcbr0' bridge,
> which LXD then always used for its own containers.
>
> That was "ok" because "lxc1" was never installed by default so it didn't
> break people who just "install ubuntu". With LXD being
> always-available-always-installed-by-default with Ubuntu, they had to be
> more conservative in their defaults. Otherwise when you just "ec2
> start-instance ubuntu" it might not work as you expect because it has
> additional bridges installed-by-default on your cloud instance that didn't
> exist in Trusty.
>
> John
> =:->
>
>
>
>> > LXD is our code.  Juju is our code.  Surely we can code/configure the
>>> two
>>> > to work together such that it just works for the 95% case?
>>>
>>> I assure you we're aware of this. Unfortunately there's not a good
>>> answer.
>>>
>>> Tycho
>>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/juju-dev/attachments/20160420/10ec0e8f/attachment.html>