[ec2-beta] ec2-attach-volume?

[Michael Lasmanis]

another +1 on not forcing the user to have java installed.

m
--
Michael Lasmanis
michael at lasmanis.com




On Mar 30, 2009, at 8:23 PM, John Hampton wrote:

> +1 on not installing the ami tools. I'd rather have a bare instance  
> and let me configure it the way that I want.
>
> JH
>
> On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 6:53 PM, Eric Hammond  
> <ehammond at thinksome.com> wrote:
>
> There are also some good reasons *not* to install the ec2-api-tools by
> default.
>
> It looks to me like it will add over 150 MB to the disk footprint of  
> the
> AMI.  This will increase the load time of the image from S3,  
> increasing
> instance startup time on EC2.
>
> In my experience and testing, the size of the image is the primary
> factor in determining instance startup time (though Amazon's image
> caching can also have an effect in some cases).
>
> The API tools require Java, so that would need to be installed on the
> image.  I'm not sure everybody will want the same version of Java
> installed on their instances.
>
> Based on the last time I tested them (months ago), the API tools  
> require
> Sun's version of Java.   In order for this to be installed, you must
> accept Sun's license.  I was not comfortable doing that when building
> public EC2 images as I would, in theory, be accepting the license for
> every person who runs those images or be forced to have them accept  
> the
> license before running it.
>
> Since we don't know many folks are going to want to use the API  
> tools on
> their EC2 instances (rare in my case), I think the above negatives
> outweigh the benefits.
>
> My belief is that the server image should be as minimal as possible,  
> not
> providing lots of extra tools just in case folks need them, especially
> since many EC2 use cases require running lots of instances where  
> startup
> time matters.
>
> I do vote for making it easy to install the API tools on an Ubuntu
> instance for folks who want to do this.  It sounds like progress is
> being made in that direction.
>
> --
> Eric Hammond
> ehammond at thinksome.com
>
>
>
> Chuck Short wrote:
> > Yes there is a good case to install the ec2-api-tools by default.  
> Amazon
> > has recently updated the license so we can distribute it the  
> archive. I
> > have already packaged it for ubuntu and it will be included in the  
> next
> > beta.
> >
> >
> > chuck
> >
> > Mark Shuttleworth wrote:
> >> Eric Hammond wrote:
> >>> The official Ubuntu beta2 images for EC2 have the EC2 AMI  
> command line
> >>> tools installed, but not the EC2 API command line tools.
> >>>
> >>> ec2-attach-volume is part of the API tools, so you would need to  
> install
> >>> them if you want to use this command on the EC2 instance.
> >>>
> >> Is there a good case for having the API tools installed by default?
> >>
> >> Mark
> >
> >
>
> --
> Ec2-beta mailing list
> Ec2-beta at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ec2-beta
>
>
>
> -- 
> John O. Hampton, Jr., CTO
> CleanOffer, Inc.
> 101 California Street
> Suite 2450 #612
> San Francisco, CA  94111
>
> Homepage: http://www.cleanoffer.com
> Blog: http://blog.cleanoffer.com
>
> (415) 240-4532 (office)
> -- 
> Ec2-beta mailing list
> Ec2-beta at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ec2-beta