LXD and trusty-backports

[John Meinel]

So according to https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UbuntuBackports backports
is enabled by default, as long as you explicitly request the packages from
backports. I did test bootstrapping an lxd trusty machine and then running:
 apt-get install lxd/trusty-backports lxc/trusty-backports
liblxc1/trusty-backports python3-lxc/trusty-backports
lxc-templates/trusty-backports lxd-client/trusty-backports
lxd-tools/trusty-backports

I'm not sure if we need all of those things, but we do need to manually
specify a few of them. (backports is available for selectively installing
packages, but will not be used to resolve dependencies, so you *also* need
to specify to get the dependencies from backports as well.)

That's probably the best solution for us on trusty. Unless people have
other ideas.

John
=:->


On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 12:38 PM, John Meinel <john at arbash-meinel.com>
wrote:

> For juju-2.0 we know that we want to be using LXD for containers.
> However, I don't believe LXD itself is going to land in trusty-updates. It
> *is* already in trusty-backports. My concern is that if we end up
> enabling trusty-backports, that may cause conflicts with charms, as they
> may get versions of code that they weren't expecting.
>
> When we ran into this on Precise, we used 2 mechanisms.
> cloud-archive[/tools] and a PPA for Juju (to give backported mongod).
>
> It would seem for customer engagements, using the official archive is the
> easiest sell, because if they are disconnected, we know they already have
> to be mirroring archive.ubuntu.com. Anything else is one more thing we
> have to teach them about.
>
> I know we also ran into problems with enabling the cloud-archive
> everywhere, because it started providing new versions of Django, etc that
> MAAS needed, which broke charms.
> We resolved that by pinning cloud-archive to lower priority and only
> installing from it by direct request. Can we do the same for
> trusty-backports?
>
> Potentially we could also only enable it when you actually go to start an
> LXD container on a machine, rather than always. Does that just cause
> confusion when charm X fails because you have containers, but succeeds when
> you don't?
>
> Is there any plan to get LXD into trusty-updates so we don't have to worry
> about this?
>
> John
> =:->
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/juju-dev/attachments/20160120/204af083/attachment.html>