but it was pretty bare. - VirtualBox: create/destroy - Provision with Chef solo - Only worked on Mac OS X and with Ubuntu VMs. Vagrant 0.1 ɼ͏·͘ಈ͔͢͜ͱͰ͖·͕ͨ͠ɼ͍ͭ͘ͷ੍ݶ͕͋Γ·ͨ͠. ྫ͑VirtulBox࡞/আͷΈɼ ProvisionChef soloͷΈɼOS X/Ubuntu ͷΈɼͳͲͰ͢
Dependable. Stable. VirtualBox only, but supports Chef, Puppet, and shell scripts. Guest VMs can be any Linux. Vagrant 1.0 ͔Βɼ͍͔ͭ͘ͷ੍ݶ·ͩ͋Δͷͷɼඇৗʹ҆ఆ͖ͯ͠·ͨ͠. ྫ͑ɼϗετ VirtualBox ͷΈରԠͰ͕ͨ͠ɼChef PuppetɼγΣϧεΫϦϓτͳͲ ͑ΔΑ͏ʹͳΓɼ·ͨɼήετVMʹ͋ΒΏΔ Linux ͕͑ΔΑ͏ʹͳΓ·ͨ͠.
provider, not just VirtualBox. Works _really_ well on Windows. Will work well with any guest, not just Linux. And... lots more TBA. ͦͯ͠ɼࠓެ։͞Εͨ Vagrant 1.1 Ҏ߱ͰɼVirtualBox Ҏ֎ʹରԠͰ͖Α͏ʹͳΓ, ·ͨɼWindows ڥͰेʹΑ͘ಈ͔ͤΔΑ͏ʹͳΓ·ͨ͠ɽ ࠓޙɼήετԾڥʹ Linux Ҏ֎͑ΔΑ͏ʹ͢Δ༧ఆʹͳ͍ͬͯ·͢.
but it won’t fail if it can’t. Example: AWS networking doesn’t map well to Vagrant networking. Vagrant + AWS will just ignore networking configurations. Not error. It’ll make a “best effort” to work. ͨͩɼϕετΤϑΥʔτͰఏڙͯ͠ΔͷͰɼϓϩόΠμ͕શʹରԠ͠ͳ͍͜ͱ͋Γ·͢ ྫ͑ AWS ͰɼVagrant ʹΑͬͯநԽ͞ΕͨωοτϫʔΫߏΛແࢹͯ͠͠·͍·͢
Metadata (AMI info) What’s in a box? It varies by provider. Actually, anything can be in a box. The provider is responsible for reading and verifying structure. ֤ϓϩόΠμʹରԠ͢ΔͨΊɼBox ৭ʑͳϑΥʔϚοτʹରԠ͍ͯ͠·͢ ྫ͑ VirtualBox OVFɼVMware VMXɼAWS ʹ AMI ϑΝΠϧͱ͍ͬͨ۩߹Ͱ͢
need it. Abstractions are nice, but sometimes you want to take advantage of specific properties of a provider. For example, AWS can do things VMware can’t, and vice versa. Provider-specific config lets you do that. ෳͷϓϩόΠμʹରԠ͢ΔͨΊɼϓϩόΠμຖʹઃఆΛՃ͑ΒΕΔΑ͏ʹͳΓ·ͨ͠ ͜ΕʹΑΓɼ֤ϓϩόΠμͰ࠷ߴͷύϑΥʔϚϯε͕ൃشͰ͖ΔΑ͏ʹௐͰ͖·͢