[Users] Status of OVZ 8 & 9

[jjs - mainphrame]

Agreed Paulo, virsh always seemed to me a sort of least common denominator,
a dumbed down and reduced capability replacement for the virtuozzo tools we
all know and love.

Jake

On Wed, Feb 1, 2023 at 6:58 PM Paulo Coghi - Coghi IT <paulocoghi at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hello Jake,
>
> Thank you for your valuable feedback! Let's see what the Virtuozzo dev
> team has to say about this issue with the GPG key for the "prlctl" tools.
>
> By the way, last time I tried virsh with OpenVZ (version 8, at the time of
> test), the experience was not good nor well documented as prlctl. But we
> are already receiving the warning about prlctl being deprecated.
>
> There are some niche cases in which virsh doesn't seem capable, like
> setting "cpulimit".
>
>
> Paulo Coghi
>
> On Wed, Feb 1, 2023 at 9:24 PM jjs - mainphrame <jjs at mainphrame.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Everything was looking good, and I was considering installing ovz 9 on a
>> physical server, but I ran into a weird issue with the GPG keys when I
>> tried to install prlctl:
>>
>> GPG key at file:///etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-Virtuozzo-9 (0x463278F2)
>> is already installed
>> The GPG keys listed for the "OpenVZ" repository are already installed but
>> they are not correct for this package.
>> Check that the correct key URLs are configured for this repository..
>> Failing package is: prlctl-9.0.2-1.vz9.x86_64
>>  GPG Keys are configured as:
>> file:///etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-Virtuozzo-9
>> The downloaded packages were saved in cache until the next successful
>> transaction.
>> You can remove cached packages by executing 'yum clean packages'.
>> Error: GPG check FAILED
>>
>> Jake
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 1, 2023 at 9:21 AM jjs - mainphrame <jjs at mainphrame.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> The iso is indeed a new image.
>>>
>>> I've installed it in a VM and have been poking around, looks promising
>>> so far, creating a few containers and taking them for a spin.
>>>
>>> Jake
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 31, 2023 at 7:21 PM jjs - mainphrame <jjs at mainphrame.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Downloading, will investigate.
>>>>
>>>> Jake
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jan 31, 2023 at 4:11 PM Paulo Coghi - Coghi IT <
>>>> paulocoghi at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> What about this one, dated 27-Jan-2023?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> https://download.openvz.org/virtuozzo/factory9/x86_64/iso/openvz-iso-9.0.1-383.iso
>>>>>
>>>>> Paulo Coghi
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jan 31, 2023 at 10:07 PM jjs - mainphrame <jjs at mainphrame.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I downloaded the vz9.iso and mounted it, and all the files are dated
>>>>>> Feb 2 2022.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, no joy, despite the deceptive Dec 2022 date on the iso.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jake
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 31, 2023 at 7:38 AM jehan Procaccia <
>>>>>> jehan.procaccia at imtbs-tsp.eu> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> actually I wonder if openvz-iso-9:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *https://download.openvz.org/virtuozzo/releases/9.0/x86_64/iso/
>>>>>>> <https://download.openvz.org/virtuozzo/releases/9.0/x86_64/iso/>*
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *openvz-iso-9.0.0.iso    24-Feb-2022 04:41     2.9G*
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> which is supposed to be the base reference for virtuozzo 9 ,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> is the same as
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://repo.virtuozzo.com/vz/releases/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *vz9.iso   20-Dec-2022 12:31      2G*
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> please let us know which .iso we should start with to test vz9 (open
>>>>>>> version)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> why haven't they the same date (Feb 2022 vs Dec 2022)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks .
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Users mailing list
>>>>> Users at openvz.org
>>>>> https://lists.openvz.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>> Users mailing list
>> Users at openvz.org
>> https://lists.openvz.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> Users at openvz.org
> https://lists.openvz.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openvz.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20230202/a14c8efe/attachment-0001.html>