Question for @julien-f In the meantime, can you explain more in details what do you have in mind? This will be helpful to point you to the right direction

Reping @stormi

I already suggested you the solution, now it's up to you to live with those process or to decide to reboot (ideally after doing updates because it's very dangerous to NOT being up to date)

@dinhngtu Thank you for the replay. I understand that cloudbase-init is a way to go. I did similar config to @jkatz and don't know why it doesn't work for me. I did exactly as you suggested, created Cloud Config settings in XO and then use that during deployment screen. [image: 1746809957038-fb2c70d1-6189-4602-9808-aec119f9ac0c-image.png] I've tried to set it up with this guide https://docs.xen-orchestra.com/vm-templates So I've added those fields : config_drive_vfat=true ... metadata_services=cloudbaseinit.metadata.services.nocloudservice.NoCloudConfigDriveService plugins=cloudbaseinit.plugins.common.userdata.UserDataPlugin into config files. I'm probably doing something wrong but I don't know where to look. It seems that cloudbase-init doesn't even start or it is skipped because my input is totally incorrect in those "User config " and "Network Config" fields. The log folder here is empty [image: 1746810406427-f22f1716-fa3e-46de-be19-6edb70f06377-image.png] Do you have any ideas why it doesn't work ? It might be the case that I'm just an idiot and did some rookie mistake as I have never used cloudbase-init before. So, I don't really know if the problem is my Custom Config settings in XO or cloudbase-init config on VM. @dinhngtu said in Cloudbase-init on Windows: As for Sysprep support specifically, I've put in a request to the XO team, although I can't promise anything specific for now. Thank you.

@Andrew Gggrrr...you know what's funny about your response?...I was actually just in the Advanced tab and glossed right over that! hahaha Thanks Andrew

@olivierlambert thanks! Logrotate seems easy enough to understand and adjust if needed. It's the audit and XOA logs that I need help understanding.

What if you disable the "VGA" in the XO UI, is it better?

@trobertson Tom Lawrence has a bit hub with all the artwork that he uses, you might want to find that and check it out.

The plugin was initially created to check RAID created during install, not custom RAIDs created manually. But that could be an improvement to the plugin @stormi I leave you the honor to add this somewhere

Question for @dinhngtu

Before answering your question, that would be good to get already something to compare. Can you try with XO and see if it's similar? It's important to understand, if the problem is related to XCP-ng or your backup solution. Also, why not asking CommVault directly too?

Keep us posted if you are stuck again, let us know

On vmware u would need als vcenter for this kind of features. And as u can easy deploy an empty xoa, why would this be an issue?

@olivierlambert I'll ask for an update in the Forums post and see what they say...

@Virtual said in Cannot get to XO Lite portal: @olivierlambert So my host IP is 192.168.1.40 and the Xen orchestra IP is 192.168.1.45 To clarify, I was referring to XO 6 Lite. Going to https://192.168.1.40 brings up the page with XoA quick deploy, cli documentation, etc. It doesn’t navigate to XO 6 lite Going to https://192.168.1.45/v6 still gives me the error mentioned in the original post Indeed, as said, there's no such thing as "XO Lite 6". XO Lite is simply "XO Lite" (we'll have a v1 at some point, v6 is like far far in the future ) So yes, https://192.168.1.40 should display XO Lite if you use XCP-ng 8.3 (you can install it manually for 8.2 but it's not bundled by default) And https://192.168.1.45/v6 should display XO 6, only if you built it correctly to get XO 6 components built.

So it looks like it was a browser cache problem, solved by deleting it.

@nathanael-h Thanks for the feedback.

@TeddyAstie Thanks for confirming it's not supported, that saves me some head scratching! I'd based the assumption of it working post boot on the stats for memory usage being low and free -m showing < 48 GiB but guess I just misunderstood. Do you know if this is a fixed limitation or is it a feature that can be added in the future?

@joncuddy @pctechsolution @archw Link send in DM