Added Almalinux 8.4

[saviodsouza]

new qcow2 base image of Alma Linux version 8.4

Before submitting a pull request, please check the following.

---

When updating an existing appliance:

• [x] The new version is on top.
• [x] The filenames in the "images" section are unique, to avoid appliances / version overwriting each other.

• [x] If you forked the repo, running check.py doesn't drop any errors for the updated file.

  When creating a new appliance:

• It's tested locally, i.e.
  • [x] You dragged an instance into a project on your box, got it installed (if necessary), and did some basic network checks (ping, UI reachable, etc.).
  • [x] GNS3 VM can run it without any tweaks.
  • [x] The device is in the right category: router, switch, guest (hosts), firewall
  • [x] You filled in as much info as possible (checks the schemas and other appliance files for some guidance).
• [x] When adding a container: it builds on Docker Hub and can be pulled.
• [x] The filenames in the "images" section are unique (to avoid appliances and/or versions overwriting each other).
• [x] If you forked the repo, running check.py doesn't drop any errors for the new file.
• [x] Optional: a symbol has been created for the new appliance.

[Desposyni]

This is full of typos where it says "AmlaLinux" instead of "AlmaLinux". Also, should the download link be some MediaFire link instead of directing to the official mirrors page [https://mirrors.almalinux.org/isos/x86_64/8.4.html]()

[saviodsouza]

oops

I'll fix the typos

The qcow2 image is a ready to use image >5Gigs. created from the iso. The original iso is >9 gigs. i will also have to update the root password so will have to re upload the qcow2 image

[saviodsouza]

Hi Thanks for merging Open media vault..

Please let me know if anything more needs to be done for almalinux.gns3a

[grossmj]

Also, should the download link be some MediaFire link instead of directing to the official mirrors page https://mirrors.almalinux.org/isos/x86_64/8.4.html

That's a good point. I am not really comfortable providing appliances that contain links to "unofficial" images

@b-ehlers @candlerb do you have an opinion about this? what kind of security risks that could create?

[candlerb]

Unless this is an artefact produced by or endorsed by the almalinux project, then I don't think it's a good idea: neither to use the "almalinux" name to describe this artefact without their permission, nor to link to some arbitrary binary blob with anonymous builder (certainly not unless there are also reproducible build scripts supplied which can generate the same artefact, with the same checksum, from almalinux original artefacts)

However, a quick google search shows there are official almalinux qemu2 cloud images downloadable here - and they are only about 500MB. Those should be used instead.

[b-ehlers]

I think, it's a difficult decision, what images should be rejected. For example, from me there is a FRR image included in this repository. OK, I have also put the packer files in here, but the builds are not reproducible. So nobody can check, if this image is a good one.

I see the following options:

• Only images from well-known vendors and from GNS3 are accepted. But what about osboxes.org? Are they acceptable? And of course, all self build images, for example from me and Andras Dosztal, have to go.
• Additionally, images are accepted, that are automatically build (for example by packer) and where some GNS3 dev reviews the build script, builds and uploads the image. But that would add some burden to GNS3.
• We keep the current situation, where GNS3 (mainly Jeremy) decides, what can be accepted. But that can cause frustration for new contributors, that are unknown to Jeremy. Even, when they created a nice application, their contribution would likely be rejected.

[grossmj]

@b-ehlers

Thanks for your input, indeed this is a difficult decision.

I think only accepting images from well-known vendors and from GNS3 is too restrictive and I still want to accept contributions from trusted contributors like you and Andras.

For new contributors, we could have a mix of the two last options, I could keep being the benevolent dictator :smiling_imp: and decide what can be accepted depending on multiple criteria: the kind of appliance, who submits it and especially if scripts to build the images(s) are provided (packer scripts would be recommended). Then we would upload the built images on our Sourceforge account.

We could also add an "official" or "verified" field to each appliance files and display a warning when an user wants to install an unofficial / unverified appliance.

[grossmj]

Newest PR for Alma Linux in https://github.com/GNS3/gns3-registry/pull/615

open-media-vault.gns3a hasn't changed