Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

perfsonar-dev - Re: [pS-dev] HELL and VMWare

Subject: perfsonar development work

List archive

Re: [pS-dev] HELL and VMWare


Chronological Thread 
  • From: "Ben Perry" <>
  • To: "Roman Lapacz" <>
  • Cc: "Nicolas Simar" <>, "Cesaroni Giovanni" <>, WiN-Labor <>, "Frederic Loui" <>, "" <>
  • Subject: Re: [pS-dev] HELL and VMWare
  • Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 09:39:05 -0400
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=ZWL1mqddbcP5lOVvHzEEpMBFBcXuxVKU3ATaJYOhUMA0r8u6RZNjXyEo3AcOUU3644t+4U/svX6Lc20EU4X2hokujAh33CYMJVZqdY93aHw8Y04W9mAXUpLZjsRPlO2Vu57Lb4DOAENtTXyQTdcIHRggjClkbNBzCKo8zx5hERc=

The benefit of using a VM is absolutely huge. Someone who knows what
they're doing does all of the administration work, configures all of
the services, and makes sure everything works flawlessly. All
accounts are created, all libraries are up to date, everything is
already compiled and executing.

The end user then only has to download a single file. One file. They
load it in the free virtual player, and everything works. They don't
spend countless hours compiling, downloading different libraries,
googling for why something doesn't work, asking their colleagues for
help, getting frustrated, and losing interest. They don't have to
download a linux distro hand hope that it works on their hardware, let
alone with PerfSonar. They don't have to read through page after page
of installation manuals. They don't need to know about yum, apt, etc.

It doesn't get any easier for an end user than downloading a single
file and clicking play.

On 5/31/07, Roman Lapacz
<>
wrote:
Nicolas Simar wrote:
>
>
> Cesaroni Giovanni wrote:
> [snip]
>>>
>>> What are the drawbacks of such methods?
>>> Could it be a way of providing easy to install perfsonar
>>> web-services or it will decrease their performances?
>>
>> The use of VMW has no particular drawbacks other than what Jochen said,
>> but I don't think it is a good solution:
>> all the sw is usually installed on a linux box by the package manager
>> of the system (for debian apt-get, for red hat yum and so on) from a
>> pakage (.deb, .rpm, ..) with just a command. It will be nice to have
>> such a linux package of each perfsonar service.
>
> What is the difference with ANT currently used?


Ant is a build tool mainly for developers. I like all solutions noted
(VM, pS linux distro, package systems). I remember that some time ago
Jeff proposed to use RPM to distribute our services. We could consider
to take package solution (usually well-known) for next pS release (we
could start with rpm and deb).

Roman




--
"Believe you can, believe you can't; either way you're right." -Henry Ford



Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.16.

Top of Page