You are here
Jeremy S - Mon, 2014/06/09 - 16:47
I built a Guacamole 9.1 appliance for my own use, and wanted to share it with you guys. I didn't have time to figure out TKLPatch, so I exported a VMWare appliance. Guacamole is a self-hosted web based RDP/VNC/Telnet/SSH solution. No longer will you need a client program to remote into other VMs or physical boxes.
http://www.filedropper.com/guacamole91appliance_1
I hope that somebody finds it useful.
Forum:
Great work and thanks for sharing
Did you document the steps required to install? If so then could you please post them?
Then someone else could create the build code. Also FWIW whilst TKLPatch I still available and useful, we are more focused on creating code for TKLDev now as that's what is already used to create the TurnKey Appliances.
For reference, all the code for the existing appliance library is on GitHub here, as are the TKLDev docs.
Documented and shown below
Hello Jeremy
In case this is still interesting I posted the documentation below.
Cheers,
//Björn
Thanks Björn! :)
I saw and I hope you don't mind, but I tidied up the formatting a little (you weren't logged in when you posted it and "guest" posts lose much of their formatting).
I've also just tweaked your user account so when you are logged in, you should be able to avoid all the spam traps now too! :)
Thanks again.
I just had a bit more of a look
And it looks cool! :)
I also noticed that it is available from the Debian repos too but it's quite an old version (v0.6.0) and it looks like there have been a lot of improvements between then and the current version (0.9.1 which I assume is what you meant...).
Thanks!
Yes, I meant 0.9.1. I should have paid more careful attention to the version numbering. I didn't document the install, but I could. Where could I learn to build the appliance myself with TKLDev? I had a little trouble following the documentation, but I have a computer science degree, and I do Linux administration, so I'd love to be able to figure it out. If I can't, where should I send the writeup? (I'd have to go back and do it, but I believe so firmly in both Turnkey and Guacamole that I'd be willing to do that.)
For sure, that'd be awesome!
My suggestion is to read through all the TKLDev docs, but particularly the development docs right through (if you haven't already) and download yourself a copy and setup in a VM. There are a few steps you need to do before you can start.
As described in the docs, basically you start with your base appliance (fork it from the closest starting point on GitHub - you'll need a GitHub account). If you're not familiar with GitHub and gitflow then this is worth a read.
You'll want to follow the steps for creating a new appliance but it may also be useful to read through the maintenance docs.
Personally I found it really useful to also have a look at other appliance build code to get an idea of how it's done in practice. Essentially, any packages that can be installed with apt-get go straight in the plan, any files you want to overlay go in the overlay directory (e.g. if you wanted to put a conf file to go to /etc/foo/conf then it goes in overlay/etc/foo/conf) and your build script(s) go in conf.d. As a general rule it's best to put downloads in a separate conf file, then install code in another. If the set up is particularly complex then you can further break it down. The conf scripts are processed in order so if you have multiple ones then prefix them with a number (i.e. the order you want them to be processed in). E.g. 00foo, 10bar, 30etc
Feel free to ask here - it's your thread! :) - and if there is anything that you think could be described better in the docs, then please let us know and we'll tweak them. Or if you know what needs to change, then feel free to fork the docs and issue a pull request.
The problem with a VMDK image
The problem with a VMDK image is that it's not reproducible. TKLDev source code is. And when a new version of Debian comes out we can just rebuild the app and it will most likely work with little maintenance. Just a bit of testing.
I'm aware, but it had to be quick and dirty.
Like I said in the original post, I made it for myself because I needed a few instances of it on a couple of servers in my infrastructure, and liked that Turnkey Core updates itself with Security Updates. Was it inappropriate to share it here?
You can use TKLBAM to go one step further
Sharing is always appropriate. Getting an image that works is a win.
It's just that there are hidden gotchas to distributing VMDK images such as having the same secret keys/credentials embedded in it because you don't go through the normal initialization process. That's another reason TKLDev source is preferable. That and we can actually import that into TurnKey.
An easy way to take the next step would be to just use TKLBAM to get more visibility into what changes you made relative to Core:
You can then have a look inside /tmp/backup and take out the non-essentials. You can test that it works by copying /tmp/backup to a clean Core install and then do this:
I just double checked
And it still seems to be valid to me (or perhaps Jeremy reuploaded it or updated the link...?)
Oops sorry...
I only checked that the link was valid, I didn't check that it was actually the full image... Sorry about that.
Guacamole .9.2
He's right, the link is down. There's an entirely new release of Guacamole though (.9.2). Jeremy, if I document the steps for installation would someone else be able to build a real Appliance? I tried, and had a lot of trouble figuring it out.
That''d be a great first step
If you can provide build docs, then that would be a great first step. I'd be more than happy to provide some support on building the appliance if you wanted to have a crack at TKLDev. But even if that feel like too much, post your build docs and we can go from there.
And thanks again for contributing to TurnKey! :)
Was an app build?
Was an app build?
Jeremy (not me!) provided a VMDK
See links above. But we are waiting for him to give us some more. I really hope that this ends up as an official appliance! :)
There is a VMDK available...
But it seems that no one has really picked up the development of this. So at this stage the time between now and an official TurnKey release is about the length of a piece of string...!
Unfortunately we are way behind on where we'd like to be. For example the v13.1 maintenance release is long overdue... So as a dev team we are stretched to our limit. We have a list of appliance requests a mile long which we will never get through unless the community can step up and help out.
Having said that though, we still really appreciate any input from anyone, even if it is just asking for an ETA. At least then we can build a picture of which appliances are most desired, so eventually when we do get it, we'll know best what to focus on...
Username and password for guacamole
So...
I've made a few more runs on the instruction on request and found that not only human mind by also mine :-) is susceptible to influence when I'm not avare of it.
The site's I've gone through to write the instruction often had an instruction that lead me to believe any username and password would do fine. And also some places it was listed tthat there was a default username guacadmin and guacadmin.
So when doing my tests this is what I used...
Now I've come to the realisation that hard coded somewhere there is hidden a must to keep those.
So if you follow the above and want it to work...
...add guacadmin both as username and password.
Cheers,
Is there any update for this?
Is there any update for this? Would be nice to have this officially support or a latest version. I've tried multiple methods and cannot get it to work on LXC.
Unfortunately not... :(
Unfortunately there has been no progress on this one. It would have been nice if we'd got to it, but we have a massive backlog and limited resources.
In the meantime if you wish to persist and already have an LXC container set up (but not working) then check the logs to see exactly what is failing. Start with the Guacamole logs, then move onto the system logs.
It might also be worth enabling "nesting" for your container - i.e. in the container config on the host. If that still doesn't work, then I suggest you try getting it working in a "proper" VM first - documenting what you do as you go. Once you have it working in a VM, then reapply the same steps in an LXC container. Then if it still doesn't work, you can look closer look again on what is failing and compare against your VM.
Apologies I don't have any better answers for you, but if you do manage to work out the issue, please post back as others will no doubt find it useful. If you still struggle to get it working, then please feel free to post back. Although please provide a bit more info. Ideally the steps you've taken, but at least the version and name of the system you are trying to install on, plus any error messages and/or log entries that seem relevant.
Good luck.
Add new comment