ICP 3.1.0 Vagrant support - ibm-cloud-private

*I used * [1]: https://github.com/IBM/deploy-ibm-cloud-private/blob/master/docs/deploy-vagrant.md
to install ICP 2.1.0.3 on my mac.
Does it support also ICP 3.1.0?

As of right now, I believe this tool cannot be used to install ICP 3.1.0 because the relevant icp-inception image has not been added to Docker Hub. When that image is available, the tool might work if you change the version parameter on line 22 in the Vagrantfile.
Even with the correct image, there may be other configuration steps that need to be taken such as changing the k8s_version or the memory requirements, since these have changed in 3.1.0.
EDIT: The image is now available on Docker Hub, but I have not tested configuring the vagrantfile to install 3.1.0 yet.

I used it successfully to install ICP 3.1 on my Linux PC. I just had to set
version = "3.1.0"
in the Vagrantfile.

Related

Install kubeadm in macOS

How to install kubeadm for Kubernetes in macOS. When tempting to use
brew install kubeadm
I get this error
Error: No available formula with the name "kubeadm"
==> Searching for a previously deleted formula (in the last month)..
NB : In macOS I can't use apt-get
Not sure about MAC OS
The supported platforms on their list are:
Ubuntu 16.04+
Debian 9
CentOS 7
RHEL 7
Fedora 25/26 (best-effort)
HypriotOS v1.0.1+
Container Linux (tested with 1800.6.0)
https://kubernetes.io/docs/setup/production-environment/tools/kubeadm/install-kubeadm/
KubeAdm is not for Desktop local environment.
You can install Docker For MAC that will install the minikube environment for you.
You are not able to directly install kubeadm and set up kubernetes cluster locally on MAC OS because of docker.
Unfortunately for MAC we should have VirtualBox where Docker will run + boot2docker.
And the best option here(as #Ijaz Ahmad Khan mentioned) is to use Docker Desktop for Mac
You can use below guide to correctly configure your cluster: How to Install Kubernetes on Mac
At the moment kubernetes server components doesn't ship any Darwin OS(MAC OS) binaries so the control plane component can't directly run under MACOS. Although they ship kubectl for Darwin OS which can use any API Server to connect to and deploy the applications.
However I was able to run the Hyperkube Binary inside the container that can support the all control plane components but this would all be under docker container so that isn't essentially a Darwin OS supported Control Plane.
You can try this if you just want to use local installs:
https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/tree/master/cluster/images/hyperkube
also If you are really looking to do everything in MAC , then possibly Install Hyperkit driver and that will allow you do pretty much the same thing to pull up the control plane images and built it up.
Damn, since this is 3 years old question, might be too late but you can use cluster on MacOS with using brew install kind.
Kind is short for Kubernetes IN Docker.
Here the documentation on more details about kind.
https://kind.sigs.k8s.io/

Vagrant 2.1.3 doensn't see plugin disksize

I upgraded from ubunutu 16 to Ubuntu 18.04.1 desktop (what i really did was reinstalled ubuntu, because i kinda destroy my system) yesterday, and now i want get vagrant back up and running, the problem is that vagrant doesn't recognize the plugin disksize any more. It is installed as you can see (with vagrant plugin list) but vagrant doesn't see it.
keep on getting * Unknown configuration section 'disksize'.
I also tried installing a older version of vagrant (1.8.5) but it looks like that doens't work with the new virtualbox (doesn't recognize the provider).
i saw the post Vagrant: * Unknown configuration section 'disksize' but that is the way i installed disksize so that doesn't help.
if more information is required let met know.
Today I updated both virtualbox and vagrant to their latest versions. Had the same problem like you just different plugin.
After downgrading vagrant to 2.10 it works again, no issue with virtualbox (no need to downgrade). Hopefully vagrant will fix this with its new release.

Elastic Beanstalk & Docker - EB CLI Does Not Work on Mac! BUG

When I try and use elastic beanstalk from the command line (ie eb create project) I got the following error.
Select a platform version.
1) Docker 17.03.2-ce
2) Docker 1.12.6
3) Docker 1.11.2
4) Docker 1.9.1
5) Docker 1.7.1
6) Docker 1.6.2
7) Docker 1.5.0
(default is 1): 1
Note: Elastic Beanstalk now supports AWS CodeCommit; a fully-managed source control service. To learn more, see Docs: https://aws.amazon.com/codecommit/
Do you wish to continue with CodeCommit? (y/N) (default is n): n
Do you want to set up SSH for your instances?
(Y/n): y
Select a keypair.
1) patientplatypus
2) phoenixvuenewsly
3) [ Create new KeyPair ]
(default is 2): 1
patientplatypus:~/Documents/newsly_project:11:56:37$eb create newsly_project_production
ERROR: Platform Docker 17.03.2-ce does not appear to be valid
patientplatypus:~/Documents/newsly_project:11:57:44$docker --version
Docker version 17.09.0-ce, build afdb6d4
I thought the above seemed understandable enough, at first. I have version 17.09.0-ce of Docker, but I need version 17.03.2-ce. It would seem reasonable that AWS would be a few versions behind the latest version of Docker if nothing else than to double check system integration and security.
However, when it came time to find version 17.03.2-ce I found it almost impossible. https://github.com/moby/moby/releases points me to 17.03.02-ce as a direct link on the downloads page, which again downloads the wrong version. I tried downloading the link to the static binaries, however that was very confusing. This page https://docs.docker.com/engine/installation/linux/docker-ce/binaries/#next-steps says that in order to get the static binaries to compile I should run the command sudo cp docker/docker /usr/local/bin/, however nowhere in that static binary folder is there a folder labeled docker.
Meanwhile this page https://docs.docker.com/docker-for-mac/release-notes/#docker-community-edition-17090-ce-mac32-2017-10-02-stable, goes from release Docker Community Edition 17.03.1-ce-mac12, 2017-05-12 (stable) to release Docker Community Edition 17.06.0-ce-mac18, 2017-06-28 (stable). Not only does this skip the one release I need, but it seems to have versions that are ahead of the most recent release at https://github.com/moby/moby/releases.
I'm very very confused. It should not be as difficult as this to get the currently stable version of Docker that runs with AWS. Can someone let me know how to resolve this issue?
EDIT:
I spun up my Linux Mint 18 (Ubuntu 16.04) and installed docker to try and get this to work. As it happens linux ALSO installs version Docker version 17.09.0-ce, however this one works with the 1) Docker 17.03.2-ce elastic beanstalk option. All the same commands on a linux environment running the same version of docker now run on eb cli. Therefore I am retitling this post as an EB CLI bug for mac. My question now is, where do I submit a bug report to AWS? I have searched for a github repository for them, but have not found it, and I think that most of their reporting through aws.amazon.com is for enterprise level customers.
Thanks!

vagrant update 1.8.1 to 1.8.5

I have installed vagrant 1.8.1 in fedora 24, this version not support for virtuvalbox 5.1, System throw this error:
No usable default provider could be found for your system.
Vagrant relies on interactions with 3rd party systems, known as
"providers", to provide Vagrant with resources to run development
environments. Examples are VirtualBox, VMware, Hyper-V.
The easiest solution to this message is to install VirtualBox, which
is available for free on all major platforms.
If you believe you already have a provider available, make sure it
is properly installed and configured. You can see more details about
why a particular provider isn't working by forcing usage with
`vagrant up --provider=PROVIDER`, which should give you a more specific
error message for that particular provider.
I eared vagrant 1.8.5 support for virtual box 5.1. so I need to update vagrant 1.8.1 to vagrant 1.8.5 (not download Here)
Suggest me how to do this in fedora 24.
If you are trying to use Vagrant on Fedora (dnf install vagrant) and get this error message when trying to use it (No usable default provider could be found), try setting it in your ~/.bashrc:
export VAGRANT_DEFAULT_PROVIDER=virtualbox
For fedora, you can download the rpm at https://releases.hashicorp.com/vagrant/1.8.5/vagrant_1.8.5_x86_64.rpm and install the rpm.

lxc-attach failed to enter the namespace - EC2 Instances

For some reason I cannot enter a docker container using Lxc-attach only on EC2 instances. This works on my local machine and on Digital Ocean (KVM) droplets but not on Amazon EC2 xen-paravirtualized Ubuntu12.04 instance. Here are the steps/errors:
root#ip-172-31-46-202:~/scalar/project/docker# lxc-ls
4074ebf985cfe09b2880a9eabbc7ad3e59283f425f64cfaa72f59f1f23661d18
root#ip-172-31-46-202:~/scalar/project/docker# lxc-attach -n 4074ebf985cfe09b2880a9eabbc7ad3e59283f425f64cfaa72f59f1f23661d18
lxc-attach: No such file or directory - failed to open '/proc/19731/ns/pid'
lxc-attach: failed to enter the namespace
Does anyone know if there is a way to resolve this issue? Here are my docker version details:
Client version: 0.7.6
Go version (client): go1.2
Git commit (client): bc3b2ec
Server version: 0.7.6
Git commit (server): bc3b2ec
Go version (server): go1.2
Last stable version: 0.7.6
Also:
lxc version: 0.7.5
What is your kernel version?
lxc-attach requires features that are not present in the native 12.04 kernel (3.5). You need at least 3.8 which IIRC is available in the backport.
As Creac suggested, the kernel was not of a high enough version. (and if I try re-deploying an AWS ubuntu image it still uses kernel 3.2)
To fix this issue, I ran the following command to get 3.8:
sudo apt-get install linux-image-generic-lts-raring linux-headers-generic-lts-raring
or you can run the following command to get 3.5
sudo apt-get install linux-image-generic-lts-quantal linux-headers-generic-lts-quantal
Please note that these commands are Ubuntu specific (as per the question) and will install the "generic" kernel rather than the "virtual" kernel, but should work. [source]
Note that I tried to update Creac's original answer with this additional information but the edit was rejected so I felt the need to create a new answer for others to use if they want.
source of where I found the commands

Resources