MAAS 1.9 can import centos images when 'Boot Images' is set to 'http://maas.ubuntu.com/images/ephemeral-v2/daily/'. However, juju can not deploy these images since the name assigned by MAAS does not match the name in the Juju tools stream.
jenkins@finfolk:~$ maas env19 boot-resources read | grep name
"name": "centos/centos66",
"name": "centos/centos70",
"name": "ubuntu/trusty",
"name": "ubuntu/trusty",
"name": "ubuntu/trusty",
"name": "ubuntu/trusty",
"name": "ubuntu/trusty",
"name": "ubuntu/trusty",
Juju expects 'centos7' which can be seen at the following URL:
https://streams.canonical.com/juju/tools/streams/v1/index2.sjson
"com.ubuntu.juju:centos7:amd64",
Reproduce as follows:
1. With MAAS 1.9 (storage set to "flat layout; bug 1499558)
2. Set 'Boot Images' to 'http://maas.ubuntu.com/images/ephemeral-v2/daily/'
3. Bootstrap with a Juju 1.24.7 client (required to avoid bug 1494476)
4. juju add-machine --series centos7
This issue can be worked around by re-adding the centos images downloaded by MAAS, as a custom image.
Image location: /var/lib/maas/boot-resources/current/centos/amd64/generic/centos70/release/root-tgz
'maas <profile-name> boot-resources create title=centos7 name=centos7 architecture=amd64/generic content@=root-tgz'
The error message reported by MAAS when requesting 'centos7' can be seen in the juju status machine output:
"3":
agent-state-info: 'gomaasapi: got error back from server: 400 BAD REQUEST ({"distro_series":
["''centos7'' is not a valid distro_series. It should be one of: '''', ''centos/centos66'',
''centos/centos70'', ''ubuntu/trusty''."]})'
instance-id: pending
series: centos7
Trying to pass 'add-machine' --series centos70 will result is an error that can be seen in Juju's machine logs:
machine-0: 2015-10-18 17:58:08 ERROR juju.worker runner.go:223 exited "environ-provisioner": failed to process updated machines: invalid series "centos70"
Hi all,
So I think in MAAS we can easily assume that if centos7/centos8 is specified by Juju, it means centos70 internally. However, provided that other centos releases are 65, 66, etc. should we also assume centos would be 70, 80 across the board?