I'm using Vagrant to deploy chef scripts to an AWS server (and it mostly works awesome). I have set up a local rsync in my Vagrantfile to mirror my dev directory onto the server.
config.vm.synced_folder "../geoevents", "/vagrant/geoevents-repo"
And this syncs find on 'vagrant provision'. I'm wondering if there is an easier way that I can have vagrant only trigger that rsync, or to control how often rsync occurs?
Or, should I not be using rsync, but instead mount a shared file system?
Vagrant CLI now has two new commands, vagrant rsync and vagrant rsync-auto which can do the job.
Command: vagrant rsync
This command forces a re-sync of any rsync synced folders.
Note that if you change any settings within the rsync synced folders such as exclude paths, you will need to vagrant reload before this command will pick up those changes.
https://www.vagrantup.com/docs/cli/rsync.html
https://www.vagrantup.com/docs/cli/rsync-auto.html
https://www.vagrantup.com/docs/cli/non-primary.html
Currently, you can fit your needs with the following plugin:
https://github.com/cromulus/vagrant-rsync
By the way, most of the plugin features will be available in Vagrant 1.5 (currently in development).
The vagrant-rsync is deprecated as of Vagrant 1.5. One solution out there is vagrant-unison. You may also check out this discussion. What should also work is a vagrant reload.
Related
I'm using AWS Lambda, which involves creating an archive of my node.js script, including the node_modules folder and uploading that to their infrastructure to run.
This works fine, except when it comes to node modules with native bindings (using node-gyp). Because the binding was complied and project archived on my local computer (OS X), it is not compatible with AWS's (Amazon Linux) servers.
How can I cross-compile/install a node module (specifically, node-sqlite3) so when I upload it to another server arch it runs?
While not really a solution to your problem, a very easy workaround could be to simply compile the native addons on a Linux machine.
For your particular situation, I would use Vagrant. Vagrant can create virtual machines and configure them within seconds.
Find an OS image that resembles Amazon's Linux distro (Fedora, CentOS, others that use yum as package manager - see Wiki)
Use a simple configuration script that, when run by Vagrant on machine startup, will run npm install (optionally it might also remove the node_modules folder before to ensure a clean installation)
For extra comfort, the script can also create the zip file for deployment
Once the installation finishes, the script will shutdown the VM to avoid unnecessary consumption of system resources
Deploy!
It might require some tuning if the linked libraries are not at the same place on the target machine but generally this seems to me like the best and quickest solution.
While installing the app using Vagrant might be sufficient in some cases, I have found it necessary to build the app on Linux which is as close to Lambda's Amazon Linux AMI as possible.
You can read the original answer here: https://stackoverflow.com/a/34019739/303184
Steps to make it work:
Spawn new EC2 instance. Make sure it is based on exactly the same image as your AWS Lambda runtime. You can review Lambda env details here: http://docs.aws.amazon.com/lambda/latest/dg/current-supported-versions.html. In our case, it was Amazon Linux AMI called amzn-ami-hvm-2015.03.0.x86_64-gp2.
Install nvm and use it to install the same version of Node.js as on the AWS Lambda. At the time of writing this, it was v0.10.36. You can refer to http://docs.aws.amazon.com/lambda/latest/dg/current-supported-versions.html again to find out.
You will probably need to install git & g++ compiler on the EC2. You can do this running
sudo yum install git gcc-c++
Finally, clone your app to your new EC2 and install your app's dependecies:
nvm use 0.10.36
npm install --production
You can then easily download the node_modules using scp or such.
Same lines as Robert's answer, when I had to work on my MAC in a different OS I use vm ware like Oracle's free virtualizer VirtualBox to get a linux on my mac, no cost to me. Or sign up for a new AWS account, you get a micro for a year free. Use that to get your linux box, do whatever you need there.
AWS has a page describing how to deal with native NPM modules: https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/compute/nodejs-packages-in-lambda/
I have been using some packages by installing them using the sudo apt-get command in the cloud shell. But now I want to make it permanent. I got this message in the shell
You are running apt-get inside of Cloud Shell. Note that your Cloud Shell
machine is ephemeral and no system-wide change will persist beyond session end.
You can customize your environment to permanently include this package by
updating your environment at https://cloud.google.com/console/cloudshell/environment/view.
So how to customize the cloud environment to include a package permanently?
You have several options.
1) Reinstall everything each time you launch Cloud Shell. This sounds bad but if you keep your files on GCS, the copy happens very fast.
2) Cloud Shell is a Docker container. You can modify that container so that you launch Cloud Shell using your customized container. Launch Cloud Shell. In the title bar on the right hand side is a icon that looks like a laptop. Click it. This will open a window with details on configuring the Docker container.
3) Keep everything local to your home directory. You home directory tree is persistent and will be restored each time your Cloud Shell VM is recreated.
Within Google Container OS, I would like to use it as my cloud development environment. How would I run the docker command from the toolbox? Do I need to add the docker.sock as a bind mount? I need to be able to run docker (and docker-compose) to run my development environment.
Google Container OS images come with docker already installed and configured, so you will be able to use the docker command from the command line without any prior configuration if you create a virtual machine from one of these images, and SSH into the machine.
As for docker-compose, this doesn't come pre-installed. However, you can install this, and other relevant tools/programs you require by making use of the toolbox you mentioned which provides a shell (including a package manager)in a Debian chroot-like environment (here you automatically gain root privileges).
You can install docker-compose by following these steps:
1) If you havn't already, enter the toolbox environment by running /usr/bin/toolbox
2) Check the latest version of docker-compose here.
3) You can run the following to retrieve and install docker-compose on the machine (substitute the docker-compose version number for the latest version you retrieved in step 2):
curl -L https://github.com/docker/compose/releases/download/1.18.0/docker-compose-`uname -s`-`uname -m` -o /usr/local/bin/docker-compose
You've probably found at this point that although you can now run the freshly installed docker-compose command within the toolbox, you can't run the docker command. This is because by default the toolbox environment doesn't have access to all paths with the rootfs and that the filesystem available doesn't correspond between both environments.
It may be possible to remedy this by exiting out of the toolbox shell, and then edit the /etc/default/toolbox file which allows you to configure the toolbox settings. This would allow you to provide access to the docker binary file in the standard environment by following these steps:
1) Ensure you are no longer in the toolbox shell, then run command which docker. You will see something similar to /usr/bin/docker.
2) Open file /etc/default/toolbox
3) The TOOLBOX_BIND line specifies the paths from rootfs to be made available inside the toolbox environment. To ensure docker is available inside the toolbox environment, you could try adding an entry to the TOOLBOX_BIND section, for example --bind=/usr/bin/docker:/usr/bin/docker.
However, I've found that even though it's possible to edit the /etc/default/toolbox to make the docker binary file available in the toolbox environment, when certain docker commands are run in the toolbox environment, additional errors are generated as the docker version that comes pre-installed on the machine is configured to use certain configuration files and directories and although it may be possible edit the /etc/default/toolbox file and make all of the required locations accessible from within the toolbox environment, it may be simpler to install docker within the toolbox by following the instructions for installing docker on debian found here.
You would then be able, to issue both the docker and docker-compose commands from within toolbox.
Alternatively, it's possible to simply install docker and docker-compose on a standard VM (i.e. without necessarily using a Google Container OS machine type) although the suitability of this depends on your use case.
I'm a newer for the hyperledger and just studying it by following the tutorials on http://hyperledger-fabric.readthedocs.io. I am trying to build the first network using "first-network" in the fabric-samples. The ./byfn -m generate is OK. But after typing ./byfn -m up, I meet
/bin/bash: ./scripts/script.sh: No such file or directory
error and the process hangs.
What is going wrong?
PS: The OS is Windows 10.
Check to see if you have a local firewall enabled. Depending on your docker configuration, a firewall may prohibit the docker daemon from accessing share drives as specified in docker setup (windows).
Restart the Docker daemon after applying local firewall changes.
I was facing the same issue and could resolve it.
The shared network drive needs to be working for any directory on the local machine to be identified from the container.
Docker for example has the "Shared drive" usually c:\ under which all your byfn.sh paths shall be present. Second condition is you need to be running the byfn.sh script with the same user who was authenticated to share the drives on the container. Your password change on the windows environment could break the already existing shared drives with the containers, hence creating problems in starting them.
Follow these steps :
In your docker terminal check the path $HOME. Type the command echo $HOME.
Make sure that your fabric-samples folder is the same path as of the variable $HOME.
Follow the steps for generating your first network.
or try the below solution.
Follow these steps :
Go to settings of docker.
Click on reset credentials.
Now check if the shared drives include the required drives or not.
If not, then include them apply your changes and restart your docker and your bash where you were trying to start your network.
I know the question is old but i have faced the similar issue so i did the following
./byfn.sh -m generate
./byfn.sh -m up
i was missing .sh in both commands.
I've installed a Vagrant + Virtualbox using Chef (+library chef). When I do vagrant up first time, cookbooks get loaded correctly. However, when I do provision afterwards (be it vagrant provision, vagrant reload --provision or vagrant up --provisionI get this error:
Shared folders that Chef requires are missing on the virtual machine.
This is usually due to configuration changing after already booting the
machine. The fix is to run a `vagrant reload` so that the proper shared
folders will be prepared and mounted on the VM.
I searched everywhere and the only solution given is to do vagrant reload --provision, this worked up up to Vagrant 1.3.1.
it seems like there is a bug with sync folders, this clears the cache and fixed it for me. (from your project directory)
rm .vagrant/machines/default/virtualbox/synced_folders
vagrant reload --provision
https://github.com/mitchellh/vagrant/issues/5199
EDIT: this should be fixed in vagrant 1.7.4
That's a fairly common issue with the Vagrant plugins for both Berkshelf and Librarian. Just get used to running that command.
The way to avoid it is to use something like Test-Kitchen instead of the Vagrant plugins. That isn't a drop-in replacement though.