andrewsmedinaniemeyer: error: Get https://api.launchpad.net/devel/people/+me: x509: certificate has expired or is not yet valid03:40
niemeyerandrewsmedina: I get Object: <lp.registry.model.person.PersonSet object at 0xa787750>, name: u'+me:'03:52
andrewsmedinaniemeyer: Im trying to send a proposal with lbox and returns this error03:59
niemeyerandrewsmedina: Ok, not sure then04:03
niemeyerandrewsmedina: Please ping me tomorrow if you still have the issue.. I really need some bed time now04:04
rogpeppedavecheney: yo!06:35
davecheneyrogpeppe: howdy06:36
davecheneyyou've got some commits to make my man06:36
davecheneygustavo green lighted a heap of branches overnight06:36
davecheneyI would also be very keen to hear your feedback on my proposal for the provisioning agent06:37
rogpeppedavecheney: i only see one actually, but maybe i'm missing something06:38
davecheneyrogpeppe: the ConfigNode one got the tick06:38
davecheneywhat about upload-tools ?06:38
rogpeppedavecheney: i already submitted the confignode one06:38
rogpeppedavecheney: i'm interested in feedback on https://codereview.appspot.com/6213050/06:39
* davecheney looks06:39
rogpeppedavecheney: any particular reason that ProviderService is an interface?06:50
davecheneySo I can mock it06:50
davecheneyyou could make an argument either way06:50
davecheneyit's still a wip06:50
rogpeppedavecheney: i'm wondering if there's a need to mock it when we can mock the state itself.06:51
davecheneyrogpeppe: indeed, there are probably other ways to do it06:51
davecheneyrogpeppe: but putting that to one side, do you have any comments on the use of the an internal goroutine which insulates callers from the environ reloading ?06:56
rogpeppedavecheney: i think it looks good.06:56
rogpeppedavecheney: although i'm still mulling over the implications06:56
davecheneyrogpeppe: when I sat down yesterday and realised I had two loops of control going on at once; the machines watcher and the environ watcher06:57
davecheneyit appeared simpler to model it this way06:57
davecheneythere are also interesting possibilities to introduce paralism06:58
davecheneyrogpeppe: also, rewriting machine watcher (again), https://codereview.appspot.com/6210066/06:59
rogpeppedavecheney: i guess i'm slightly surprised that the machines watcher doesn't just watch the environs config too07:00
rogpeppedavecheney: it looks like you've still got two loops of control going on07:00
rogpeppedavecheney: although i may misunderstand how AddMachine etc are intended to be used.07:01
davecheneyrogpeppe: s/AddMachine/StartInstance/g, s/RemoveMachine/StopInstance/g07:01
davecheneyI should have used better names07:01
rogpeppedavecheney: i don't think that affects the point though. who's calling those methods?07:02
davecheneyrogpeppe: provisioning.go07:02
davecheneyrogpeppe: it also just occured to me, why don't I just implement the environs.Envrion interface07:03
rogpeppedavecheney: we've got dummy for that, perhaps.07:03
davecheneythe goal is to buffer callers to those methods from having to deal wit the fact the environ is not ready/available07:03
rogpeppedavecheney: that's only right at the start though, yes?07:03
rogpeppedavecheney: can we do anything at all until that happens, in fact?07:04
davecheneyrogpeppe: hmm, the way gustavo explained it, we have to deal with the fact that environ can change at any time07:06
rogpeppedavecheney: that's no problem i think. i'll paste a little pseudo code to try and explain what i'm thinking.07:07
rogpeppedavecheney: http://paste.ubuntu.com/993735/07:11
rogpeppedavecheney: as a very rough sketch07:11
davecheneyrogpeppe: yup, that is what I had first07:11
rogpeppedavecheney: so where's the other loop of control?07:11
davecheneyso, what happens if case e := <-envWatcher: env = e07:12
davecheneyfires, and the env is now broken or nil07:12
davecheneyalso, once c := <-configWatcher has fired, we need to keep trying that action until it succeeds, or the process exits07:13
davecheneyso, if e is broken, then we need to put c somewhere, then come back to it when e is not broken07:13
rogpeppedavecheney: two possibilities: either you loop inside that arm of the select when env is broken, until it's not; or you introduce another goroutine so that only valid environments are send on the env watch channel07:14
davecheneyrogpeppe: I think i've implemented the latter07:14
davecheneyrogpeppe: but sort of inside out07:15
rogpeppedavecheney: yeah07:15
rogpeppedavecheney: i *think* things would be clearer (and probably smaller) if the extra goroutine *just* did that - another component in the pipeline, with no side effects.07:15
davecheneyrogpeppe: hmm, i do like simplicity07:16
davecheneyand it would resolve the requirement to have two stages, waiting for the first environ, then acting on changes07:16
davecheneyrogpeppe: you are right, that is a lot simpler07:17
rogpeppedavecheney: we have to decide if having an invalid environ should cause the provisioning agent to stop until it's valid, or continue with the old, valid environ07:17
davecheneyrogpeppe: that could be the blocker07:17
rogpeppedavecheney: my problem with the current proposal is that there are really two loci of control, and i think that's awkward.07:17
rogpeppedavecheney: both are possible, i think, and not hard.07:17
rogpeppedavecheney: we just have to decide what semantic we actually want07:18
davecheneyrogpeppe: in your env <- channel approach, you always have _an_ environ; but there is no way to give it a broken one07:18
davecheneyin my approach, you always hold a proxy environ, which may block calls through it if the undernlying environ is invalid07:18
rogpeppedavecheney: in that case, you choose the first approach i mentioned07:18
rogpeppedavecheney: "loop inside that arm of the select when env is broken, until it's not"07:19
davecheneyrogpeppe: i need to ponder this07:19
rogpeppedavecheney: that automatically excludes the other part of the select from acting on it.07:19
davecheneyi like your approach, it's less code and clearer07:19
rogpeppedavecheney: cool.07:20
davecheneyrogpeppe: i guess it comes down to 'what is broken'07:21
rogpeppedavecheney: yes - and "what do we want to do about that?"07:21
davecheneyi see there are two kinds of broken, one is missing key fields, basically unyaml'ing ""07:21
davecheneythe other is valid, but incorrect, so incorrect AWS credentials07:22
davecheneywhich I don't think is invalid, tf/ it shuld be passed to the provisioning agent, and provisioning attempted against it07:22
rogpeppedavecheney: yeah. so the first *should* never happen. a goroutine filtering out those occurrences and logging them would probably be fine.07:23
davecheneyrogpeppe: i think it's the opposite07:23
davecheneythe first will always happen07:23
rogpeppedavecheney: agreed. i don't think you can tell otherwise.07:23
rogpeppedavecheney: really?07:23
davecheneywhen the provisioning agent starts up, /environment is ""07:23
rogpeppeyes, but that's a special case at the start, which we cater for specifically07:24
davecheneyit has to wait until it gets a config node that is properly formed07:24
rogpeppewe wait until that time has passed before entering the provisioning loop proper07:24
rogpeppewhat about when we're *in* the loop?07:24
rogpeppei don't *think* we should see it then07:24
rogpeppeunless something else fucks up07:25
rogpeppedavecheney: BTW what happened to our idea of having a goroutine per machine?07:26
davecheneyrogpeppe: kinda fell in a heap when I understood that environment could change over time07:27
rogpeppedavecheney: hmm. i *wonder*... we could just model the environ as a global variable, guarded by an RWMutex.07:28
davecheneyrogpeppe: that is what I was aiming for with the ProviderService07:28
davecheneyby communicating with it via a channel, it has a mutex of sorts07:28
davecheneyit only accepts your commands when it's in a state to act on them07:28
davecheneyotherwise they block07:29
* rogpeppe thinks07:30
rogpeppedavecheney: thing is, if we want any concurrency at all, when the environment changes, there are still going to be actions acting on the old environment.07:33
davecheneyrogpeppe: i agree07:34
rogpeppedavecheney: which i think is ok. we just want to make sure that any new actions use the new environment.07:34
davecheneyrogpeppe: so actions on the Environ are going to fail, and should be retried (via some business logic)07:34
davecheneyso the key will be they can pick up the new value of Environ07:35
davecheneyrogpeppe: which sort of leans me back to my original proposal this morning07:35
rogpeppedavecheney: exactly - we need to distribute the new Environ to everyone07:35
davecheney'except i'll make it implment a full proxy Environ, so you can just keep retrying against the proxy.07:35
rogpeppedavecheney: i think it's quite a lot of code for something that's really just a mutexed global variable at heart.07:36
rogpeppedavecheney: and if you do it that way, we can keep the original vision of having a separate goroutine for each machine, right at the heart of the provisioning agent.07:38
davecheneyrogpeppe: here is a quick stab at your version, http://paste.ubuntu.com/993760/07:38
davecheneyrogpeppe: yes! so each 'machine' proxy has a channel for commands, provision yourself, deprovision yourself07:39
davecheneyand those commands talk to the Environ proxy07:39
rogpeppedavecheney: yeah07:39
davecheneyand they retry according to some business logic07:40
davecheneythat would solve one of my concerns about running adds and deletes in parallel07:40
rogpeppedavecheney: yeah07:40
davecheneythis has been very useful07:40
rogpeppedavecheney: great!07:40
davecheneyunfortuntely i'm going out in 20 minutes07:40
davecheneybut i'll hack on this when I get home07:41
rogpeppedavecheney: np, i'm glad i got up early...07:41
davecheneywhat time is it in +1 over there ?07:41
davecheneyit's 17:4007:41
rogpeppedavecheney: 084107:41
rogpeppedavecheney: thanks for the comments on the simplified provider interface, BTW07:43
davecheneyrogpeppe: i think i attempted a half assed version of that when I did environ.NewEnviron, but ended up backing out most of it07:43
rogpeppedavecheney: it seems to mesh well. and i think the overall line count probably dropped, which is always a good sign...07:44
davecheneynever hurts07:45
rogpeppedavecheney: i like the fact that Check now matches NewEnviron. and when we have Marshal, that'll return the same type too.07:46
davecheneyrogpeppe: now that is good, and less untyped interface{}'s07:48
rogpeppedavecheney: defo07:48
rogpeppedavecheney: BTW in the provisioning agent, i *think* you'll only want one channel to the machine goroutine - to remove the machine.07:51
davecheneyrogpeppe: yeah, i'll be doing some surgery on that tomorrow07:51
davecheneybut for now, it's good night from me07:51
rogpeppedavecheney: have a good one!07:51
rogpeppefwereade: ping10:18
fwereaderogpeppe, pong10:21
rogpeppefwereade: hiya10:21
fwereaderogpeppe, (landing stuff doesn't count as working :p)10:21
fwereaderogpeppe, heyhey10:21
fwereaderogpeppe, but I am actually about to stop ;p10:21
fwereaderogpeppe, I'm off until weds now :010:21
rogpeppefwereade: just wondered if you could clarify about the machine key stuff, but don't worry if you're stopping10:22
fwereaderogpeppe, regardless, what can I do for you while I'm here?10:22
fwereaderogpeppe, it's just a vague sense that the correspondence between keys and ids feel coincidental rather than fundamental10:22
rogpeppefwereade: what is a machine key?10:22
rogpeppefwereade: i know about machine ids and instance ids10:22
rogpeppebut not machine keys...10:23
fwereaderogpeppe, it's the node name in zookeeper10:23
fwereaderogpeppe, machine-000000000110:23
rogpeppefwereade: and that's not named after the machine id?10:23
fwereaderogpeppe, it feels to me that that's an accident of happenstance rather than a fundamental truth10:24
rogpeppefwereade: it's not always fmt.Sprintf("machine-%010d", machine.Id) ?10:24
rogpeppefwereade: what's primary?10:24
rogpeppefwereade: we talk about machine id 0 for the bootstrap machine, for example10:24
fwereaderogpeppe, I guess it's just an idea that juju ids *ought* to increase "smoothly" rather than just monotonically10:25
rogpeppefwereade: what's the difference?10:25
fwereaderogpeppe, just that the fact that we can end up skipping an id that's held by an orphan node has the feel of a leaked implementation detail10:25
rogpeppefwereade: when are we going to add more than 1 to the new machine id?10:26
fwereaderogpeppe, and that the platonic ideal of juju would have machines 0-N without skipping any10:26
rogpeppefwereade: when do we get an orphan node?10:26
fwereaderogpeppe, when something bad happens after the node has been created but before the topology is updated10:26
rogpeppe"something bad"?10:26
fwereaderogpeppe, someone trips over a network cable, say10:27
fwereaderogpeppe, this is not something I'm strongly invested in though10:28
fwereaderogpeppe, I think I'm -0 rather than -110:28
rogpeppefwereade: i'm slightly surprised that the node is created *before* the topology is changed.10:28
fwereaderogpeppe, the topology needs to know which node it's pointing to10:28
rogpeppefwereade: that doesn't square with my understanding of the way things work, but that's fairly sketchy!10:28
fwereaderogpeppe, if we update the topology first, we can't guarantee what the next sequence node will be10:29
rogpeppefwereade: the topology doesn't just talk about "machine 0", "machine 1", etc?10:29
fwereaderogpeppe, I'm pretty sure it knows which keys it's pointing to, but I could be on crack10:30
rogpeppefwereade: so the machine-000001 node name can skip numbers, but not the machine id, right?10:30
fwereaderogpeppe, coincidentally they do always correspond IIRC10:30
rogpeppefwereade: what about orphans?10:30
fwereaderogpeppe, they're just trash10:30
fwereaderogpeppe, they don't exist according to the topology, which is the sole source of truth10:31
rogpeppefwereade: what are they named?10:31
fwereaderogpeppe, they would, I think, be named after the key; but they don't exist so the question is philosophically shaky ;)10:31
rogpeppefwereade: i'll try to explain what i think i understand, and perhaps you can tell me if i'm more-or-less right10:31
rogpeppe1) someone calls add-unit10:31
rogpeppe2) the client adds a machine node to the state10:32
rogpeppe3) the client adds a topology node referencing the new machine node10:32
fwereaderogpeppe, I think so, yeah10:32
rogpeppe4) the provisioning agent sees the change to the topology node and starts a new instance10:32
fwereaderogpeppe, exactly10:33
rogpeppe5) the new machine registers that it's up in its machine node.10:33
rogpeppeso the problem with orphan nodes happens if the network breaks between 2) and 3)10:33
fwereaderogpeppe, probably, I forget the details of the machine agent; I think it has a separate presence node10:34
fwereaderogpeppe, yeah10:34
fwereaderogpeppe, sorry: but lunch is on the table10:34
rogpeppefwereade: ok10:34
rogpeppefwereade: one last question to ponder:10:34
fwereaderogpeppe, may have a moment before I leave later but don;t count on it10:34
* fwereade listens10:34
rogpeppefwereade: why doesn't the provisioning agent allocate the new machine node?10:34
rogpeppefwereade: anyway, enjoy your time at home! go to lunch! (early lunch, BTW! i've just had breaky...)10:35
fwereaderogpeppe, I can't think of a good reason, that may be a nicer way to do it10:36
fwereadeI'll think :)10:36
fwereaderogpeppe, train at proper lunchtime :)10:36
fwereaderogpeppe, cheers10:36
rogpeppefwereade: ttfn10:36
rogpeppethere ought to be a word for the noise a branch makes when landing.11:23
niemeyerGOod morning all13:30
rogpeppeniemeyer: hiya!13:39
rogpeppeniemeyer: pretty quiet around here...13:39
rogpeppeniemeyer: thanks for okaying that huge branch BTW13:39
niemeyerrogpeppe: Yeah, quiet indeed13:46
niemeyerrogpeppe: Must be Friday :)13:46
niemeyerrogpeppe: I'm just sipping some chimarrĂ£o and going over the inbox for a moment13:46
rogpeppeniemeyer: fwereade's on hols. don't know about TheMue13:46
niemeyermthaddon: Thanks for checking out that charm13:46
niemeyerrogpeppe: He said he'd be out too.. don't recall if he'd be back today or not13:47
rogpeppeniemeyer: i'm thinking about refactoring dummy a little13:47
niemeyerrogpeppe: I think it's fine for the moment..13:47
rogpeppeniemeyer: i realised that i wanted it to serve urls (for the storage URL service) and it's awkwardly structured for that13:47
niemeyerrogpeppe: I'd prefer to keep pushing forward, and then get back later once we have some more use cases known13:48
niemeyerrogpeppe: Hmm13:48
niemeyerrogpeppe: What's the issue?13:48
rogpeppeniemeyer: the difficulty is that we now want two storage services from the same dummy environ13:49
niemeyerrogpeppe: How's that a problem?13:49
rogpeppeniemeyer: and the way environ is the same as storage doesn't work too well with that13:49
niemeyerrogpeppe: Ah, I see, yeah, might be good to have that fixed13:50
rogpeppeniemeyer: and i realised that really the environ shouldn't be recreated with every Environ.Open13:50
rogpeppeniemeyer: it should be shared, as part of state.13:50
rogpeppeniemeyer: so...13:50
rogpeppeniemeyer: that means that we can't take all the environ settings from the environ config (otherwise that gives too much precedence to the first one parsed)13:51
rogpeppeniemeyer: so...13:51
niemeyerrogpeppe: Hmm.. yeah, and it wasn't recreated..?13:51
niemeyerrogpeppe: That's what we had Reset for, right?13:51
rogpeppeniemeyer: i'm thinking that perhaps Reset should take an argument which asks for the kind of capabilities we want13:51
niemeyerrogpeppe: I don't think that's necessary13:51
rogpeppeniemeyer: so you can ask for a dummy env that mocks zookeeper, perhaps (in the future), or serves a storage web server, or has a required field in the config13:52
rogpeppeniemeyer: at the moment all those things are determined by the provider config, which seems slightly wrong.13:53
niemeyerrogpeppe: I don't think that's necessary.. config is passed onto Open.. mocking ZooKeeper is not on the table right now, and serving a storage web server may be done a single way13:53
niemeyerrogpeppe: There's really no great reason to increase the number of knobs there13:53
niemeyerrogpeppe: Why is it wrong ? dummy is a provider.. and you're talking about configuring it13:54
niemeyerrogpeppe: I'd like to make it simpler, not more complex13:54
rogpeppeniemeyer: because the configuration is shared; the configuration is used to connect to it, not create it.13:54
rogpeppeniemeyer: also, i was slightly hoping to avoid starting a new web server on every Reset. but i guess that's ok really.13:55
rogpeppeniemeyer: it currently seems slightly bogus that i require a zookeeper attribute on all dummy environ configs, just so i can check that starting an environment with a missing attribute fails correctly.13:57
rogpeppe[14:54:39] <rogpeppe> niemeyer: because the configuration is shared; the configuration is used to connect to it, not create it.13:58
rogpeppethat was badly said13:58
rogpeppei meant "the environment is shared"13:58
niemeyerAram: Heya14:19
andrewsmedinaniemeyer: Hi14:20
niemeyerandrewsmedina: Yo14:39
niemeyerrogpeppe: Re. https://codereview.appspot.com/6203083/, did you discuss ideas with Dave this morning?14:43
rogpeppeniemeyer: yeah. we came up with something quite nice i think.14:44
niemeyerrogpeppe: That's great, thanks a lot14:44
rogpeppeniemeyer: i could paste the relevant log if you like14:44
niemeyerrogpeppe: I'll mark the branch as WIP14:44
niemeyerrogpeppe: I'm happy to wait for the result of it14:44
rogpeppeniemeyer: i think it should be marked as that anyway - at least that was his intention14:44
rogpeppeniemeyer: did you take a look at https://codereview.appspot.com/6213050/ ?14:45
niemeyerAh, and so it is14:45
rogpeppeniemeyer: it's my "i have an idea" from the other evening14:45
niemeyerrogpeppe: Not yet.. it's the largest branch in the queue, so I've been reviewing the others first14:45
rogpeppeniemeyer: np14:45
niemeyerrogpeppe: But I'll get there14:46
niemeyerWe should dial back the branch sizes.. yesterday most of them were over 400 lines14:46
niemeyer(of diff)14:46
rogpeppeniemeyer: BTW the tests are broken at the moment. i think william forgot to run tests before submitting...14:47
niemeyerrogpeppe: Cool, we should get a fix in soon14:47
rogpeppeniemeyer: i wanted to but the fix wasn't immediately obvious to me and i'm trying to get this stuff proposed.14:48
rogpeppeniemeyer: only problem is, in integrating the previous branches, i want to insert a branch before one i've already proposed... it's a pity that's not easy. i'll just not stack them, i think, and mark the last one as WIP14:48
rogpeppeniemeyer: some of the diffs are made larger by the fact that not everyone runs gofmt before proposing/submitting.14:51
rogpeppeniemeyer: some time it might be nice to make lbox fail if go files aren't gofmted.14:52
niemeyerrogpeppe: I generally try to make branches independent when pushing my own work14:53
niemeyerrogpeppe: Tends to pay off in these cases14:53
rogpeppeniemeyer: me too, but in this case, the reason i want to insert a branch is because i want to use some of that functionality in the upcoming branch, but don't want to bloat it.14:54
niemeyerrogpeppe: Well, in that case there's no choice.. just propose the branch and put the follow up as WIP or repropose with pre-req14:54
rogpeppeniemeyer: can't change the prereq once proposed, sadly14:55
rogpeppei think14:55
rogpeppei'll just wait until the prereq is submitted14:55
rogpeppeniemeyer: here's the prereq: https://codereview.appspot.com/6209078/16:47
niemeyerrogpeppe: Checking16:49
rogpeppeniemeyer: it's time for me to go; have a great weekend!17:02
niemeyerrogpeppe: For you as well.. almost finishing the review17:03
rogpeppeniemeyer: great, thanks a lot17:03
hazmatrogpeppe, have a good one17:03
rogpeppehazmat: and you. you still up for that editor challenge BTW? :-)17:05
hazmatrogpeppe, anytime! :-)17:06
rogpeppehazmat: alright, i'll see how much sublime costs and whether i can deal with it...17:07
* hazmat wonders if he should start recruiting some ringers for the challenge17:07
hazmatrogpeppe, its free to try out17:07
rogpeppehazmat: ringers?17:07
hazmatrogpeppe, experts posing as novices17:07
hazmatrogpeppe, so wait.. i have to learn acme then?17:08
rogpeppehazmat: that's the deal17:08
* hazmat forget the challenge details17:08
rogpeppehazmat: acme exclusively for a month17:08
rogpeppehazmat: well, apart from when it's not possible17:08
hazmatrogpeppe, not this month then17:08
hazmatrogpeppe, incidentally how do you install it?17:08
rogpeppehazmat: grab the plan9port tarball, run INSTALL17:09
hazmatrogpeppe, cool thanks17:10
hazmatrogpeppe, yeah.. i'm under some tight deadlines, so not this month, but i'm game17:10
rogpeppehazmat: i am too (he says, worried about dropping productivity :-])17:11
rogpeppeanyway, gotta go17:11
andrewsmedinaniemeyer: I still could not send the proposal17:33
niemeyerandrewsmedina: Ok, let's see then17:33
niemeyerandrewsmedina: What's going on?17:33
andrewsmedinaniemeyer: http://dpaste.org/XKeHn/17:39
niemeyerandrewsmedina: Try to load https://api.launchpad.net/ in your browser17:42
niemeyerandrewsmedina: What OS and OS version are you using?17:42
andrewsmedinaniemeyer: ubuntu and centos17:42
niemeyerandrewsmedina: At the same time!? :-)17:42
andrewsmedinaniemeyer: yes, with vms :)17:43
niemeyerandrewsmedina: I mean where is this command failing17:43
niemeyerandrewsmedina: On both?17:44
andrewsmedinaniemeyer: I tryed do a wget http://paste.ubuntu.com/17:44
andrewsmedinaniemeyer: I tried on ubuntu and centos17:44
andrewsmedinaubuntu 12.0417:44
niemeyerandrewsmedina: Ok, that's pretty weird17:44
niemeyerandrewsmedina: Are you under a proxy?17:45
niemeyerandrewsmedina: Could the proxy be getting in the way of the https connection?17:45
andrewsmedinaniemeyer: I dont use proxy here17:46
niemeyerandrewsmedina: Wow, do you develop as root?17:46
andrewsmedinaniemeyer: :-p17:47
niemeyerandrewsmedina: Can you see my look of disapproval from there? ;-)17:47
andrewsmedinaniemeyer: I use "andrezias" user to (on ubuntu). But in centos I use root :-p17:48
niemeyerandrewsmedina: Can you please try to wget from https://api.launchpad.net/devel/branches?17:48
niemeyerandrewsmedina: Tsc tsc :)17:48
andrewsmedinaniemeyer: same result17:50
niemeyerandrewsmedina: Sounds like you have a bad set of certs17:55
niemeyerandrewsmedina: Have you tried to update your installation?17:55
andrewsmedinaniemeyer: installation of?17:58
niemeyerandrewsmedina: Of your OS18:01
andrewsmedinawhy? how so version can affect the launchpad certs?18:03
andrewsmedinaso == OS :p18:04
niemeyerandrewsmedina: The certificates that are used to verify the validity of a given site certificate are installed in your disk18:15
andrewsmedinaniemeyer: humm.. my vms are headless18:16
andrewsmedinabut I already used lbox another times without problem18:17
niemeyerandrewsmedina: Why is it an issue that your vms are headless?18:18
andrewsmedinaniemeyer: when lpad tell do aprove the req I opened it on my mac os ( :-p )18:25
niemeyerandrewsmedina: This is irrelevant for the problem.. the certificates within the vms must work too18:25
andrewsmedinaniemeyer: you're right18:28
* hazmat lunches bbiab18:43

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!