MRatWork Forum by Mustafa Ramadhan

General Discussions => Non Technical Discussions => Topic started by: fossxplorer on 2015-06-21, 16:33:39

Title: HyperVM fork?
Post by: fossxplorer on 2015-06-21, 16:33:39
@Mustafa, have you ever thought of forking HyperVM beta?
It seems to be the only VPS control panel out there that is FOSS and usable, but it lacks some love.
You've done a lot to Kloxo-MR with regards to UX and icons etc.
I think HyperVM beta with similar work with refreshed icons etc would rock.
Title: Re: HyperVM fork?
Post by: MRatWork on 2015-06-21, 16:53:07
No plan for HyperVM but have a plan to handle (add/update/delete) OpenVZ VM in Kloxo-MR panel.
Title: Re: HyperVM fork?
Post by: fossxplorer on 2015-06-22, 10:55:02
That would truly make Kloxo-MR unique :)
Can we expect to test this soon? :)

Hopefully, more of the community and the users of Kloxo-MR should donate to this project when OpenVZ support comes in!

No plan for HyperVM but have a plan to handle (add/update/delete) OpenVZ VM in Kloxo-MR panel.
Title: Re: HyperVM fork?
Post by: MRatWork on 2015-06-22, 10:59:31
Still thinking better using OpenVZ or LXC. OpenVZ need special kernel but no for LXC.
Title: Re: HyperVM fork?
Post by: fossxplorer on 2015-06-22, 11:14:41
Very good point!
Redhat is pushing LXC very hard these days. They do even have an Enterprise version called Red Hat Enterprise Linux Atomic Host, which is based on docker and LXC, IIRC.
Another important point is that RHEL7 and CentOS 7 have extensive support for LXC (using much more recent kernel as you mention). There is also templates for LXC: https://github.com/lxc/lxc/tree/master/templates.
 
Being able to manage VMs with libvirt and friends (libvirt-lxc) will be of huge interest to many sysadmins who prefer cmd line :)

Is there really any cons to drop OpenVZ at all? I don't see any!

Can you re-use some code from HyperVM maybe?

EDIT: also, it might be good for Kloxo-MR to develop LXC support on a CentOS 7 to avoid using 2.6 branch of the Linux kernel :)
 

Still thinking better using OpenVZ or LXC. OpenVZ need special kernel but no for LXC.
Title: Re: HyperVM fork?
Post by: dkstiler on 2015-09-14, 22:48:25
Hypervm to be of any services needs many things rewritten as of the current beta i know since i track it it works adequate well with openvz but it has lots of issues on xen with centos 6 and i suspect some of them are also exist in centos 5.

The only way to make this product viable is to rewrite some of its routines to work with libvirt for accessing hypervisors there is no other way .. since it would be useless to make from scratch any new drivers for the different hypervisors out there!!

Though i can say that if mustafa wants to fork it, im more than willing to help him in any way to make that panel viable ;)
Title: Re: HyperVM fork?
Post by: fossxplorer on 2015-10-10, 21:41:30
@mustafa, what do you think about @distiler's suggestion?

Also, i came over http://claudyus.github.io/LXC-Web-Panel/ today. Might help us if you decide to go the LXC route. But i like the suggestion from  @distiler since a rewrite to support libvirt basically means support for both many virtualization  and containers.