Home | News | Download | Packages | Forum | Wiki | Github

Is there any Void Linux EC2 AMI

(Pedro Narciso García Revington) #1


It is quite dificult to run any linux vps without systemd. I can not find any Void Linux EC2 AMI
Does anyone of you run void in EC2?




Tbh you’re probably better off using FreeBSD on EC2.

(Michael Aldridge) #3

I have the build scripts ready to go for an EC2 AMI as well as Vagrant boxen and similar but I need some other stuff merged in front of these changes before they can be published.

(Pedro Narciso García Revington) #4

Do you have them in a repo?

(Michael Aldridge) #5

I do not have them public yet. There is still some more cleanup that I need to do so that they work on things other than my development laptop.

(Pedro Narciso García Revington) #6

If you want some help with the clean up or anything else please let me know :slight_smile:

(M. Dietrich) #7

Are there any news on this topic? I played around a bit with AWS recently and first look was for an Voidlinux AMI but could not find anything (not even on amazon marketplace :wink: ).

(Michael Aldridge) #8

There is an AMI, its an ugly hack. Right now if you want Void in the cloud there are working GCP images. I can build AMI’s trivially but until cloud-init is packaged for Void they won’t be of much use.

This can be sped along by either packaging cloud-init or building a service which can consume the EC2 metadata feed and provision the box.

UPDATE: Its also worth pointing out that AMIs are notoriously complicated and Void may not support both Instance store and EBS type AMIs due the the overhead. If we are forced to choose one I am inclined to choose the EBS type. Another thing that’s worth pointing out is that you’ll probably never see an official Void AMI on the marketplace for the same reason you won’t see a Void GCP image within Google Cloud: Void is a rolling release distro. It doesn’t make sense for use to use the storage and bandwidth it would take to spin new images regularly when we can instead provide either a ready to upload AMI that is updated every few months, or a script to build it on demand.

(Alessio) #9

I think it does make sense instead. I would want to run my application on a minimal void linux image, with just the minimal packages needed, so updating them everyday would not be a problem. I think that it could make sense updating regularly with an update script scheduled every day.


If we would have endless storage or endless donations to pay for it.
The package repository and the few live images already push us to a less than 1TB is not enough scenario.

(Michael Aldridge) #11

@aleroot I think you haven’t worked with cloud much if you think that.

For an image to be on the EC2 marketplace it needs to live in an S3 bucket (or did the last time I checked). It costs to store things in that bucket and it costs to move that data around. Since you propose generating new images on a regular basis that storage will balloon over time (and no, you can’t just drop old versions, there are other problems with that). For GCP there is no marketplace and sharing images would require us to jump through the same hoops of storing the images and paying for that storage.

With both of these solutions there’s also the unbounded cost of cross-region transit if someone spins up the image from the official copy in a different region than the hosting one. EC2 wins here, but not by much. Cross region traffic is expensive and we really can’t deal with an unbounded cost, those are dangerous things for anyone and doubly so for smaller projects.

If you want a cloud image you can use mklive to generate an image and then host it yourself, then you can spin up as many VMs from it as you desire. If this is a feature that people care about, I’ll consider adding a make target to upload the image (though I personally consider this basic knowledge to have when using a cloud platform).