[WORK IN PROGRES - do NOT merge] Replace builtin CentOS 5.x with 8.0 templates

[andrijapanicsb]

Description

New default/bultin templates for major hypervisors:
(new PR, instead of #3710 )

• CentOS 8.0 (VMware/KVM/XenServer)
• Minimal install with "standard" / "core" groupinstall (a.k.a. additional network tools - ifconfig, route, etc.)
• nano, iftop, iotop, htop, bash-completion, traceroute
• ssh running, systemctl stop/disable firewalld, SELinux disabled
• disabled "predictive" interface names (net.ifnames=0 added to kernel boot line)
• stripped UUID/MAC from eth0 network config file
• VMware: opensource variant "open-vm-tools" installed - recommended by VMware (instead of using the one from ESXi hosts); both vmw_pvscsi and vmxnet3 drivers present and details added to vm_template_table to spin VMs with those devices
• XenServer: XenServer Tools 6.5sp1 installed (xs-tools confirmed as running, considering this is CentOS8 which the xs-tools installation script was not aware of)
• KVM: no special configuration, VirtIO present by default

Types of changes

• Enhancement (improves an existing feature and functionality)

Screenshots (if appropriate):

How Has This Been Tested?

Templates were deployed on ACS install with old versions of hypervisors: VMware 5.5, XenServer 6.5sp1 fully patched up to patch 1066 and CentOS 7.3 (3 clusters, mixed env) and verified to work on those versions of hypervisors.

Yet to be tested against VMware 6.0/6.5/6.7, XenServer 7.0, 7.1, 7.x and Ubuntu 16/18, CentOS 7.6 maybe - but if it works on older ones than any newer hypervisor should be no problem.

Comment:

• The only concern is that XenServer 6.5 must have all the patches installed (confirmed that patch XS65ESP1066 is needed) - otherwise, CentOS 8 (actually, anything newer than CentOS 7.2) will not boot successfully.

[andrijapanicsb]

Looking good - ACS deploys successfully and downloads the correct template (base on the HV present in the Zone).

From my side, this is LGTM (though this doesn't count).
Will test deploying same templates on multiple other versions of vSphere/XenServer/KVM just to ensure the OS itself can boot properly.

[andrijapanicsb]

@blueorangutan package

[blueorangutan]

@andrijapanicsb a Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. I'll keep you posted as I make progress.

[blueorangutan]

Packaging result: ✖centos6 ✔centos7 ✔debian. JID-389

[andrijapanicsb]

Don't run tests until I sort out Trillian usage of templates (we currently replace template DB URLs with custom/internal repo which is pointing to CentOS 5.5, so it makes whole testing useless). I have work in progress here.

[andrijapanicsb]

Tested with latest hypervisors we support atm - and all works fine:

• VMware 6.7 U3
• XenServer 7.6
• CentOS 7.7 (stock qemu/libvirt versions)

[andrijapanicsb]

This one needs to be parked for some time - MANY Marvin tests are failing since we are relying on builtin CentOS 5.x templates during testing - and now when using CentOS 8, with just 128MB of RAM Offerings, there is kernel panic inside CentOS8 due to low RAM so Marvin tests will fail.

This will need some more planning around Marvin testing/templates used.
Actually, this PR is fully good to go, without touching Marvin tests, since we replace URLs of bultin templates with internal URLs - so from Marvin side still all good.

[yadvr]

@andrijapanicsb use something lightweight like alpinelinux or even stripped down debian? (we can actually make the systemvmtemplate be used as a user template as well)

[andrijapanicsb]

That makes sense @rhtyd - just needs some time and effort to be changed - but, again, can be done irrespective of this PR - since Trillian replaces URLs always, so this PR will NOT affect Marvin tests.
I agree for something much more lightweight (or worst case, just keep using same CentOS 5.5, if there is nothing even MORE lightweight, considering we give those VMs just 128MB of RAM)

[DaanHoogland]

It is not a bad idea to combine default SVM template with builtin, imnsho

[DaanHoogland]

are we abandonning this as it is centos8, @andrijapanicsb @rhtyd @GabrielBrascher ?
And will we plan a new implementation for #3700?

[yadvr]

Agree we should abandon this and revisit something else. The purpose of the build-in template is for testing only, I don't think most users/service providers etc would use the built-in tempalte in prod, so maybe an argument could be we don't need the built-in template (the current one is okay) or may be have the debian/systemvmtemplate itself be used as a built-in template.

[DaanHoogland]

@andrijapanicsb closing this, please reopen if you feel this is inappropriate