After all-in-one setup node-cert.pem and node-pk.pem not found

[Robert Collins]

This might be a dupe, I don't know enough to say for sure.

On karmic, I installed UEC with all the packages, at once, following the PackageInstall wiki page.

It all appeared to go well, including the node registration. However, when I checked the instances available, it had found 0.

Doing
$ sudo su - eucalyptus
$ cd /var/lib/eucalyptus/keys/
$ cp test1/node-cert.pem .
$ cp test1/node-pk.pem .
$/usr/sbin/euca_conf --register-nodes 192.168.1.4

made it all come good.

ProblemType: Bug
.etc.eucalyptus.eucalyptus.cc.conf: CC_NAME="test1"
Architecture: amd64
Date: Wed Feb 10 16:20:26 2010
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 9.10
NonfreeKernelModules: nvidia
Package: eucalyptus-nc 1.6~bzr931-0ubuntu7.4
ProcEnviron:
 PATH=(custom, user)
 LANG=en_AU.UTF-8
 SHELL=/bin/bash
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 2.6.31-14.48-generic
SourcePackage: eucalyptus
Uname: Linux 2.6.31-14-generic x86_64

[Mathias Gug (mathiaz)]

Hi Robert,

Could you confirm that you installed both the CC *and* the NC on the same system?

[Robert Collins (lifeless)]

On Tue, 2010-03-02 at 15:26 +0000, Mathias Gug wrote:
> Hi Robert,
>
> Could you confirm that you installed both the CC *and* the NC on the
> same system?

yes

-Rob

[Thierry Carrez (ttx)]

@Robert: this is not a supported topology, upstream always told us NCs need to be separated systems (yes, makes testing a little more resource-consuming).

[Robert Collins (lifeless)]

On Wed, 2010-03-03 at 07:46 +0000, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> @Robert: this is not a supported topology, upstream always told us NCs
> need to be separated systems (yes, makes testing a little more resource-
> consuming).
>
> ** Changed in: eucalyptus (Ubuntu)
> Status: Incomplete => Invalid

It works fine: its documented in the topologies page; fixing the bug
should be pretty easy.

Pretty much the major 'but I can't use it' thing I've heard while
lurking in #ubuntu-server was 'but I need two machines to test it... and
I don't have em'.

So I urge you to consider this wishlist at most, rather than invalid.
It's *clearly* a bug in the installation environment, rather than the
software - as the software has been working flawlessly for me with this
issue addressed, on one machine.

-Rob

[Thierry Carrez (ttx)]

Agreed, it would be great if we could fix all the quirks involved in a single-system setup, so that a single machine would just work. It's just not part of the target topologies we need to support for 10.04, so I'm marking it Wishlist.

[Dustin Kirkland  (kirkland)]

Thierry/Mathias-

I've worked with Robert a bit on his setup over the last few weeks. I
must say that I'm impressed/intrigued by the possibility of (even a
minimally supported) all-in-one system, if only for demo and better
community involvement.

I agree that the bug should be wishlist, but if it's solvable, I
totally think we should fix it (at a lower priority than our release
blockers, of course).

[Torsten Spindler (tspindler)]

Having the option to host a complete UEC on one machine is also relevant
for training. Right now we fall back to one UEC per classroom due to the
two machine requirement, or at most students working in pairs.

[Dustin Kirkland  (kirkland)]

Right, I think it's valid for various NON-PRODUCTION use cases. I
just want to be clear that I don't think we should ever recommend it
for production UEC. It would be up to you to spread that message
appropriately in the classroom, Torsten ;-)

[Etienne Goyer (etienne-goyer-outlands)]

For the record, I had a all-in-one UEC system running on jaunty in SYSTEM mode a while ago. I still have my notes somewhere, although I doubt they would be very applicable to lucid.

[Robert Collins (lifeless)]

I've just done a fresh install on lucid, on one system, and these files were in place.

[Dustin Kirkland  (kirkland)]

Marking fix-released per Rob's last comment.