New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

New Driver: libvirt / KVM #659

Closed
dhiltgen opened this Issue Feb 27, 2015 · 9 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
7 participants
@dhiltgen
Contributor

dhiltgen commented Feb 27, 2015

This driver support libvirt, and at present the KVM back-end. The current implementation requires a NAT'd network with libvirt managed DHCP (via dnsmasq) to establish connectivity to the VM.

Initial Implementation: [https://github.com/dhiltgen/machine/commit/e5d159c17fc9ef497a1933c83b69d2b8d1e6f168]

@ehazlett

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@ehazlett

ehazlett Feb 27, 2015

Member

@SvenDowideit want to sync with @dhiltgen on this? Perhaps we can combine the implementations?

Member

ehazlett commented Feb 27, 2015

@SvenDowideit want to sync with @dhiltgen on this? Perhaps we can combine the implementations?

@SvenDowideit

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@SvenDowideit

SvenDowideit Mar 4, 2015

Contributor

we've synced a little when I get back to australia, I'll look at my code a bit further, I'm not sure if we should just combine these 2 drivers, or make a more shared abstraction.

Contributor

SvenDowideit commented Mar 4, 2015

we've synced a little when I get back to australia, I'll look at my code a bit further, I'm not sure if we should just combine these 2 drivers, or make a more shared abstraction.

@sthulb

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@sthulb

sthulb Mar 4, 2015

Contributor

Are we still avoiding libvirt due to it's C bindings?

Contributor

sthulb commented Mar 4, 2015

Are we still avoiding libvirt due to it's C bindings?

@ehazlett

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@ehazlett

ehazlett Mar 4, 2015

Member

@sthulb no we were just avoiding using libvirt as the layer between all drivers.

@SvenDowideit sounds good. I'm not sure either. @dhiltgen what do you think?

Member

ehazlett commented Mar 4, 2015

@sthulb no we were just avoiding using libvirt as the layer between all drivers.

@SvenDowideit sounds good. I'm not sure either. @dhiltgen what do you think?

@sthulb

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@sthulb

sthulb Mar 4, 2015

Contributor

OK! I was just making sure 😄

Contributor

sthulb commented Mar 4, 2015

OK! I was just making sure 😄

@Brandl

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Brandl

Brandl May 3, 2015

Any progress on this? (+1 for libvirt support)

Brandl commented May 3, 2015

Any progress on this? (+1 for libvirt support)

@ehazlett

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@ehazlett

ehazlett May 4, 2015

Member

I would like to see libvirt as well however I would really like to see the two implementations come together to have a single driver.

Member

ehazlett commented May 4, 2015

I would like to see libvirt as well however I would really like to see the two implementations come together to have a single driver.

@efrecon

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@efrecon

efrecon May 25, 2015

Any progress or decision on this?

efrecon commented May 25, 2015

Any progress or decision on this?

@ehazlett

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@ehazlett
Member

ehazlett commented May 27, 2015

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment