| * thumper tries to formulate some replies | 02:27 | |
| axw | thumper: did you want to look at my local-storage auth change before I land? I have fwereade's LGTM | 02:31 |
|---|---|---|
| thumper | axw: have I reviewed it? | 02:31 |
| axw | thumper: no, just fwereade | 02:31 |
| * thumper is replying to the upgrade emails | 02:31 | |
| thumper | nah, I trust you, and if fwereade has acked it, that is good enough for me | 02:32 |
| axw | okey dokey | 02:32 |
| axw | cool | 02:32 |
| axw | thumper: the gist is, using TLS client certs for authentication; authentication=authorisation | 02:32 |
| * thumper nods | 02:33 | |
| thumper | school run time | 02:58 |
| thumper | axw, wallyworld: reminder on the code review time in 15 min | 03:16 |
| wallyworld | yep | 03:16 |
| axw | thanks | 03:21 |
| thumper | ugh | 04:26 |
| thumper | having a very meh day | 04:27 |
| axw | thumper: I didn't really understand this statement in your email- "I think I agree with William here, these are more associated with a | 04:36 |
| axw | provider rather than just agent config." | 04:36 |
| thumper | axw: I was thinking that we wouldn't need to put it in the config | 04:36 |
| axw | my intention was for the provider to control what jobs get put into the MachineConfig, which drives agent.Config creation | 04:36 |
| thumper | but in state | 04:36 |
| axw | thumper: yes, but the bootstrap process puts the jobs into state | 04:36 |
| thumper | the machine jobs are defined in state | 04:37 |
| thumper | are we talking about the bootstrap jujud process? | 04:37 |
| thumper | or the machine agent? | 04:37 |
| axw | yep | 04:37 |
| axw | um | 04:37 |
| axw | what's the difference? | 04:37 |
| axw | cmd/jujud/bootstrap.go | 04:37 |
| thumper | one is 'jujud bootstrap' the other is 'jujud machine' | 04:37 |
| axw | currently does an InjectMachine with hard-coded set of jobs | 04:38 |
| thumper | there is a key/value store in format 1.16 | 04:38 |
| axw | oh right. I'm talking about the former | 04:38 |
| thumper | for the agent config | 04:38 |
| thumper | so if you use that, you don't need to teach the format anything new | 04:38 |
| axw | hmm yes, it just felt a bit wrong to put it into something so free-form... but I suppose the machine agent doesn't care about this at all | 04:39 |
| thumper | right | 04:39 |
| thumper | but I do get your meaning | 04:39 |
| thumper | could be command line params to the bootstrap ? | 04:39 |
| thumper | although that isn't much better | 04:40 |
| thumper | and then creates a mix of data sources | 04:40 |
| axw | thumper: they've all got pros and cons, so I guess key/value will do; at least there's no format change required then | 04:44 |
| * thumper nods | 04:44 | |
| axw | thumper: it sounds like we're thinking along the same lines regarding upgrades | 04:44 |
| thumper | good | 04:44 |
| axw | I was thinking more after I sent my email last night, and that the code that I will need to add for this could be used for state schema upgrades | 04:45 |
| thumper | even the multi-version jump? | 04:45 |
| axw | yes definitely | 04:45 |
| thumper | good | 04:45 |
| thumper | I think that previously that has been in the "too hard" basket | 04:45 |
| axw | having to hop along like that sounds horrible | 04:45 |
| thumper | but it definitely needs to be done | 04:45 |
| thumper | I keep thinking back to what we did with postgresql | 04:45 |
| thumper | where we had a number of patch files | 04:45 |
| thumper | a similar thing could be done for our version changes | 04:46 |
| thumper | for each minor version, we have a slice of functions to call | 04:46 |
| thumper | that will modify state based on what was left by the previous call | 04:46 |
| axw | yep that makes sense | 04:46 |
| thumper | so going from say 1.16 -> 1.18 would just require the one stack to be called | 04:46 |
| thumper | but 1.16 -> 1.22 (say) would run three, one after the other | 04:46 |
| * thumper waves hands | 04:47 | |
| thumper | magic | 04:47 |
| axw | :) | 04:47 |
| axw | thumper: so I'm vaguely thinking that there'll be an environs/upgrade package, which will handle generic upgrades, and defer to an optional EnvironUpgrader interface, which an Environ may implement | 04:48 |
| axw | haven't thought through in much detail yet | 04:48 |
| axw | environs/upgrade would do schema upgrades | 04:49 |
| thumper | sounds good to me | 04:49 |
| axw | EnvironUpgrader would do provider-specific things, like adding jobs | 04:49 |
| thumper | axw: I'm wondering whether state/upgrade should do schema upgrades given that state has the core "state" | 05:03 |
| axw | thumper: yes, probably | 05:04 |
| * thumper calls a wash on today, back tomorrow | 05:05 | |
| === axw_ is now known as axw | ||
| rogpeppe | mornin' all | 07:12 |
| axw | hey rogpeppe | 07:15 |
| rogpeppe | axw: hiya | 07:15 |
| rogpeppe | nice to see juju getting a shout out in this talk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYukPc0y_Ro | 07:22 |
| axw | rogpeppe: yeah, saw that this morning - very nice! :) | 07:23 |
| rogpeppe | axw: last night thumper mentioned an email thread about upgrades - where is that? | 07:39 |
| axw | rogpeppe: I emailed fwereade and rogpeppe only; I'll forward to you if you're interested | 07:40 |
| axw | err not rogpeppe ) | 07:40 |
| rogpeppe | axw: please | 07:40 |
| axw | :) | 07:40 |
| axw | thumper | 07:40 |
| axw | actually I'll just CC the list, since it's grown into something that everyone will probably care about | 07:41 |
| rogpeppe | good plan | 07:41 |
| rogpeppe | wallyworld: hiya | 07:42 |
| wallyworld | hi | 07:42 |
| rogpeppe | wallyworld: you've replied to this, but i don't think you've pushed your changes yet : https://codereview.appspot.com/13842044 | 07:42 |
| wallyworld | i have | 07:42 |
| wallyworld | i pushed to lp | 07:43 |
| rogpeppe | wallyworld: could you re-propose too, please? | 07:43 |
| wallyworld | it's been merged also | 07:43 |
| wallyworld | :-( | 07:43 |
| rogpeppe | wallyworld: so i can see the changes in codereview | 07:43 |
| wallyworld | i don't have that branch easily assessicle right now | 07:43 |
| wallyworld | look at lp | 07:43 |
| rogpeppe | ok | 07:43 |
| wallyworld | bit stressed trying to get @^%^@!^%@! gpg working | 07:43 |
| wallyworld | i can't generate a private key have have Go use it | 07:44 |
| rogpeppe | wallyworld: but in general it's nice to have the pushed version in codereview because the link is in the commit message | 07:44 |
| wallyworld | guess so | 07:44 |
| wallyworld | i hate codereview | 07:44 |
| rogpeppe | wallyworld: you can't generate a private key? | 07:44 |
| wallyworld | too hard to use | 07:44 |
| rogpeppe | wallyworld: funny, i think it's really good, but there y'go | 07:44 |
| wallyworld | i can generate fine'but when i try and use it in go, it complains it is encrypted | 07:45 |
| rogpeppe | wallyworld: what library are you using? | 07:45 |
| wallyworld | so i have a private key block which i got from pgp, then i use keyring, err := openpgp.ReadArmoredKeyRing(bytes.NewBufferString(signedMetadataPrivateKey)) | 07:45 |
| wallyworld | i trying to generate some signed data to test with, i have both public and private key blocks from a test key i generated in gpg | 07:46 |
| wallyworld | errors.InvalidArgumentError = "signing key is encrypted" ("openpgp: invalid argument: signing key is encrypted") | 07:46 |
| wallyworld | is the error | 07:46 |
| wallyworld | i'm not sure how to make a signing key that is unencrypted | 07:47 |
| wallyworld | rogpeppe: i hate codereview because i can't see the whole diff at once, so it's hard for me to navigate around the changes | 07:48 |
| rogpeppe | wallyworld: i like codereview because i can see the whole file in context (and all the comments) | 07:48 |
| rogpeppe | wallyworld: but it would be nice if it was much faster | 07:48 |
| wallyworld | yeah | 07:49 |
| wallyworld | rogpeppe: i got to go and buy dinner, but if you had a clue as to how I can get a pulic and private key i can use with openpgp in go that would be awesome | 07:49 |
| rogpeppe | wallyworld: i'll have a look | 07:50 |
| wallyworld | thanks | 07:50 |
| wallyworld | i have a test private key but that comes from g a go lib test | 07:50 |
| rogpeppe | wallyworld: did you see this bug BTW? https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju-core/+bug/1229839 | 07:50 |
| _mup_ | Bug #1229839: provider/ec2: LiveTests.TestBootstrapWithDefaultSeries is broken <juju-core:New for wallyworld> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/1229839> | 07:50 |
| wallyworld | and the data is precanned | 07:50 |
| wallyworld | i replied | 07:50 |
| rogpeppe | wallyworld: so you haven't generated the private key yourself? | 07:51 |
| wallyworld | we have had that SetToolsPrefix in the code for a long time' | 07:51 |
| rogpeppe | wallyworld: it's hideous! | 07:51 |
| wallyworld | rogpeppe: i have, but go refuses to import as | 07:51 |
| wallyworld | per the above error | 07:51 |
| wallyworld | rogpeppe: i have a chunk of text wrpped with -----BEGIN PGP PRIVATE KEY BLOCK----- etc | 07:52 |
| wallyworld | but i can't use ReadArmoredKeyRing to get something i can sign stuff with | 07:52 |
| rogpeppe | wallyworld: what command line did you use to generate your gpg private key? | 07:52 |
| rogpeppe | wallyworld: just so i can reproduce your issue | 07:52 |
| wallyworld | rogpeppe: i used seahorse and exported it | 07:52 |
| * rogpeppe hasn't heard of seahorse | 07:53 | |
| wallyworld | i generated a sign only key | 07:53 |
| wallyworld | it's a gpg gui | 07:53 |
| wallyworld | rogpeppe: but i guess "gpg --gen-key" would have worked | 07:53 |
| rogpeppe | wallyworld: that's ok, i can never remember the gpg usage either :-) | 07:54 |
| axw | wallyworld: I just generated one, it worked for me | 07:56 |
| axw | with --gen-key | 07:56 |
| wallyworld | wtf | 07:56 |
| wallyworld | can you read it using ReadAmouredKeyRing | 07:57 |
| wallyworld | without getting an error | 07:57 |
| axw | wallyworld: yep | 07:57 |
| wallyworld | did you type in a passphrase when you generated it? | 07:57 |
| wallyworld | axw: i'm stupid | 07:58 |
| wallyworld | the reading in bit qorks | 07:58 |
| wallyworld | works | 07:58 |
| wallyworld | it's the signing that fails | 07:58 |
| wallyworld | plaintext, err := clearsign.Encode(&buf, keyring[0].PrivateKey, nil) | 07:58 |
| wallyworld | fails | 07:58 |
| axw | ah | 07:58 |
| wallyworld | using the keyring read in | 07:58 |
| axw | wallyworld: did *you* type in a passphrase? | 07:59 |
| axw | will seahorse allow you not to? | 07:59 |
| wallyworld | no, i'll try command line | 07:59 |
| axw | (gpg --gen-key assigned one even when I said not to) | 08:00 |
| wallyworld | not sure if that will force it | 08:00 |
| wallyworld | i how do i get an unencrypted private key is the question | 08:01 |
| wallyworld | don't know why Go needs that | 08:01 |
| wallyworld | anyway, got to run to get dinner, back layter | 08:01 |
| axw | wallyworld: call PrivateKey.Decrypt(passphrase) | 08:05 |
| axw | wallyworld: see the comment on the PrivateKey.Encrypted field (http://godoc.org/code.google.com/p/go.crypto/openpgp/packet#PrivateKey) | 08:06 |
| axw | rogpeppe: if you didn't see it yet, I forwarded the upgrade email chain to juju-dev | 08:07 |
| rogpeppe | axw: thanks | 08:07 |
| rogpeppe | axw: here are some notes i made on major-version upgrades a while ago: http://paste.ubuntu.com/6153562/ | 08:20 |
| axw | rogpeppe: heh, pretty much what I wrote I think :) nice to know I wasn't off base | 08:26 |
| axw | the pending flag bit is a bit different | 08:26 |
| rogpeppe | axw: yeah, it seemed pretty similar | 08:26 |
| jamespage | davecheney, still around? | 08:26 |
| axw | rogpeppe: I think thumper was suggesting that the API server just lock out all connections, and API clients keep attempting to reconnect | 08:26 |
| axw | so the "pending flag" is in effect cleared when they can finally connect | 08:27 |
| axw | I kinda like that approach | 08:27 |
| rogpeppe | axw: just shutting off access to all agents seems a little draconian. | 08:31 |
| rogpeppe | axw: but it does have some advantages | 08:31 |
| rogpeppe | axw: like you don't have to wait for everyone | 08:32 |
| rogpeppe | axw: but i think it might be good to let all the agents download their new version before we start to upgrade | 08:32 |
| rogpeppe | axw: that way we can have a clean break | 08:33 |
| axw | rogpeppe: what if the API server fails during upgrade? how would you roll back the tools on the machine agents? | 08:34 |
| axw | or do you mean, download but don't action | 08:34 |
| rogpeppe | axw: both are possible | 08:35 |
| wallyworld | jam: i have 2 simplestreams mps, which fix the issues you were talking about, i'm hoping to get these into 1.15 https://codereview.appspot.com/13899044/ https://codereview.appspot.com/13888043/ | 08:35 |
| wallyworld | i got to go make dinner, but back later | 08:35 |
| rogpeppe | axw: if we make sure that at least the new API is backwardly compatible to the point of finding out the agent version, then agents can downgrade if the upgrade fails | 08:35 |
| axw | that sounds reasonable | 08:36 |
| dimitern | fwereade, hey | 10:01 |
| dimitern | fwereade, quick question | 10:01 |
| dimitern | fwereade, if we don't take an environ in NewSimpleAuthenticator in the provisioner, how should we get the state and api infos? The manual provisioner needs a state connection I think, so we can't just return nil stateInfo | 10:02 |
| jam | fwereade: standup ? | 10:46 |
| jam | https://plus.google.com/hangouts/_/3d4586c62aa1310a0c3f40960494578688c86f1a | 10:46 |
| jam | fwereade: ^^ | 10:50 |
| fwereade | huh, hangout experiencing difficulties | 11:26 |
| * TheMue => lunch | 12:16 | |
| dimitern | fwereade, ping | 12:30 |
| abentley | sinzui: ping for standup | 13:33 |
| fwereade | natefinch, https://codereview.appspot.com/13802045/ LGTM with comments (and a followup?) -- let me know what you think | 14:49 |
| fwereade | natefinch, wait, sorry, I seem to have skipped some files | 14:50 |
| fwereade | natefinch, added to it | 14:52 |
| fwereade | natefinch, maybe not LGTM any more, but should be reasonably simple to address | 14:56 |
| fwereade | natefinch, I think you just need to make a distinction between nil tags and empty tags | 14:57 |
| natefinch | fwereade: good point about masking tags | 15:10 |
| dimitern | ping | 15:41 |
| dimitern | :) | 15:42 |
| dimitern | i meant fwereade ping | 15:42 |
| mgz | was going to ask :) | 15:42 |
| fwereade | dimitern, heyhey | 15:45 |
| fwereade | dimitern, looking | 15:45 |
| natefinch | fwereade: good call on empty tags... we actually aren't handling it well at all. tags= is getting treated as a single empty string tag, rather than an empty list | 16:17 |
| mgz | erk | 16:20 |
| fwereade | mgz, eh, that's what review are for | 16:21 |
| natefinch | ironcically, the "round trip" serialization tests don't catch this (I didn't have a test for it, but I added one, that still passes) | 16:21 |
| fwereade | natefinch, thanks for checking it out | 16:21 |
| mgz | fwereade: yeah, but I really should have looked out for that >_< | 16:21 |
| natefinch | because []string{""} serializes the same as []string{} | 16:21 |
| natefinch | so, I wrote a specific test for it to check that tags= gets deserialized into []string{} ... which currently fails, but I'll fix that. TDD, woo! | 16:22 |
| mgz | yeay! | 16:23 |
| * fwereade cheers | 16:23 | |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: fancy a small review (ExtraConfig in configstore)? https://codereview.appspot.com/13912043/ | 16:33 |
| rogpeppe | mgz, dimitern, TheMue, natefinch: ^ | 16:33 |
| mgz | looking | 16:34 |
| TheMue | me too | 16:34 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe: one minor comment, otherwise LGTM | 16:39 |
| rogpeppe | TheMue: i'd prefer not to define yet another map[string]interface{} type | 16:40 |
| rogpeppe | TheMue: i'm wondering about consolidating all of them to one type | 16:40 |
| rogpeppe | TheMue: but in the meantime it's nice to avoid the type conversion if it's used with testing.Attrs, for example | 16:40 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe: as those types doesn't cost a lot i like them explicit to give a better semantic expression | 16:41 |
| rogpeppe | TheMue: what does that mean? | 16:41 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe: especially when you set data not directly near to the function call | 16:42 |
| rogpeppe | TheMue: sorry, i'm not sure i get you | 16:42 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe: you can say cfg := ExtraConfig{"foo": 1234} then do something else, maybe add some more config, and later call SetExtraConfig(cfg) | 16:43 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe: in this case already the initialization shows the usage of the data | 16:43 |
| rogpeppe | TheMue: it's never going to be used that way | 16:43 |
| dimitern | rogpeppe, +1 on naming types like map[string]interface{} | 16:44 |
| dimitern | rogpeppe, we have too many too generic ones already | 16:44 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe: sure for every developer until eternity? ;) | 16:44 |
| rogpeppe | dimitern: i think map[string]interface{} expresses exactly what is required | 16:44 |
| rogpeppe | dimitern: but i'm thinking of creating utils.Attrs and making *everything* use that | 16:44 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe: it's technical, yes, but it doesn't say anything about the intention | 16:45 |
| dimitern | rogpeppe, i don't want to argue, just giving my opinion | 16:45 |
| TheMue | dimitern: thanks | 16:45 |
| rogpeppe | TheMue: neither does "int", but we don't retype every int | 16:45 |
| rogpeppe | TheMue: the argument name or function name is usually good enough | 16:45 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe: will start to refactor :D | 16:45 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe: but if it is enough you don't even need to create a utils.Attrs | 16:47 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe: then let as stay with it as it is | 16:48 |
| rogpeppe | TheMue: the current advantage to using an unnamed type is that it's compatible with other named types. | 16:48 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe: that's right | 16:49 |
| rogpeppe | TheMue: and also, given that config.Config.AllAttrs returns map[string]interface{}, I think my function should accept that exact type, because that's where its attributes are coming from | 16:50 |
| dimitern | rogpeppe, there's already testing.Attrs btw | 16:50 |
| TheMue | many attrs ;) | 16:50 |
| dimitern | rogpeppe, and it's map[string]interface{}, so maybe while deciding to refactor all such cases should be considered in the codebase | 16:51 |
| rogpeppe | dimitern: i know - i made it :-) | 16:51 |
| * TheMue has to step out, somehow i'm stuck with my testing and will start freshly tomorrow morning | 16:51 | |
| rogpeppe | dimitern: i'd move it to utils | 16:51 |
| rogpeppe | dimitern: and then make everything use it | 16:51 |
| TheMue | rogpeppe: +1 for utils, yes | 16:52 |
| TheMue | so, good n8 everybody | 16:53 |
| rogpeppe | mgz: about the overall intention of the ExtraConfig stuff: the intention is that the extra configuration attributes are created only once, at Prepare time; subsequent operations should not add attributes, as that may well be racy. | 16:58 |
| rogpeppe | mgz: adding endpoint address information should not be racy, as everyone will be trying to save the same info, so it's idempotent | 16:59 |
| mgz | rogpeppe: okay, I sort of see | 17:00 |
| mgz | but then how does that distinguish from just not letting the config get overritten once in place? | 17:00 |
| mgz | *w | 17:00 |
| mgz | (having the bool "has this been created" flag, that is) | 17:00 |
| rogpeppe | mgz: well, create fails if the info already exists | 17:01 |
| rogpeppe | mgz: so you can only set extra config attrs if you are the one that first created the info | 17:01 |
| rogpeppe | mgz: ... does that make sense? i'm not sure i understood your question | 17:02 |
| mgz | hm, sort of, I think this is implementation detail rather than something that will break things later anyway | 17:03 |
| natefinch | man, I love tests. I found like 4 bugs with the tests I wrote in the last hour | 17:04 |
| mgz | natefinch: :D | 17:04 |
| natefinch | mgz, fwereade: btw, you both missed the fact that constraints.IsEmpty had no tests, and actually had a bug in it ;) | 17:04 |
| mgz | I complained about the indenting, which should give me half points... | 17:05 |
| natefinch | rofl | 17:05 |
| natefinch | the indenting is as gofmt would have it, all hail gofmt | 17:06 |
| mgz | but but... it makes no sense ;_; | 17:06 |
| natefinch | mgz: it's grouping | 17:06 |
| natefinch | mgz: it's showing explicitly with the indenting what the implicit order of operations will do | 17:07 |
| natefinch | mgz: gofmt does similar stuff when it's all on one line by using spaces or no spaces to show what will get calculated together, it's actually pretty awesome | 17:08 |
| dimitern | fwereade, there it is the secret attrs patch https://codereview.appspot.com/13916043 | 17:09 |
| rogpeppe | oops, just pastebin'ed all my aws security credentials | 17:10 |
| mgz | natefinch: I'd understand if it was just the indent after the ||, it's the indent after the first && that makes no sense | 17:10 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: FYI here's what the environment info file looks like with *all* the attributes stored in it: http://paste.ubuntu.com/6155286/ | 17:12 |
| natefinch | mgz: it makes more sense if you put another || at the end like this: http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/6155319/ | 17:12 |
| mgz | okay, but that still took a little bit of thinking about, I'd be breaking out the brackets if I got that far | 17:14 |
| natefinch | mgz: yes, in general... but it's handy if you think you know what it's doing , and turn out to be wrong... at least you get a hint of it. | 17:14 |
| natefinch | mgz: this kind of thing has already saved my butt: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/golang-nuts/qFtA6g8AIxE/oumyR1ytP4MJ | 17:15 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, hmm, I dislike that a bit less than I expected to | 17:15 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: i think it has some definite advantages - it's nice being able to see everything in one place, minus all the config initialisation magic | 17:16 |
| fwereade | natefinch, ouch, I was so happy to see IsEmpty everywhere | 17:16 |
| natefinch | fwereade: well, there's a test for it now, no harm, no foul. :) | 17:16 |
| * fwereade strokes his chin thoughtfully | 17:17 | |
| natefinch | (given that I was the wrong that wrote it and failed to write a test.....) | 17:17 |
| natefinch | s/wrong/one | 17:17 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, it just feels like it's asking to replicate the Conn problems | 17:21 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: the Conn problems? | 17:21 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, the Environ | 17:21 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, which is wrong | 17:21 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, and which people keep trying to use because it's so ridiculously convenient | 17:21 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: well, we'll want to purge the environment from the environ info when we can | 17:22 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: (in fact, it might even be a command) | 17:22 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: really, we only want to keep it around until after the first connection | 17:22 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: but there's that problem with what happens if you lose contact with the last-contacted API address | 17:23 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: but that's a problem for everyone, and most people *won't* have the extra config attrs | 17:23 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: so i guess i'd prefer to work on that problem (finding API endpoints without any environ credentials), and just throw the credentials away at the first opportunity | 17:24 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, well, up to a point -- we *do* still have the creds around in environments.yaml and it would be silly not to use them | 17:25 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: well, one person does, yes | 17:25 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: but by fixing the issue for other people, we fix it for that person too | 17:26 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, yeah -- taking that knowledge (along with eg control-bucket) away from that user is not helpful I think | 17:26 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: i'm not sure how much mechanism is worth adding here | 17:26 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, I accept that a global fix would be ideal | 17:27 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, but today we still need actual environ access for the CLI in a bunch of situations | 17:27 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: indeed | 17:27 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: i don't see what difference it makes how many attributes you've got in that file though | 17:27 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: you've either got the environ attrs or not | 17:28 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: keeping them all in one place makes our life simpler | 17:28 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: (and probably users' lives too) | 17:28 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, I need to sleep on it I think | 17:33 |
| dimitern | wtf is params.StatusData ? | 17:33 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, at the moment I still feel that if yu can get a complete environ config from that file alone we screwed up | 17:33 |
| fwereade | dimitern, dict of useful info attachable to status | 17:33 |
| dimitern | somebody landed this and changed machine.SetStatus() underneath | 17:33 |
| fwereade | dimitern, relation hook status reporting is particularly bad | 17:33 |
| dimitern | ok, so do need to care about it in the provisioner? | 17:33 |
| fwereade | dimitern, I think you can ignore it safely for now, nothing sets it on a machine | 17:34 |
| dimitern | fwereade, ok thanks | 17:35 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, I do see the advantages in rendering to the One True Format, once, explicitly, though | 17:36 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: that's interesting. i'm not sure *how* that means we've screwed up, given that environments.yaml+info = the same thing | 17:36 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, the problem is that it looks like a sane config but most if the time it is not | 17:36 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, I have a thought though | 17:37 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, what if we called it creation-config | 17:37 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, that might make its status a bit more apparent | 17:37 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: that's not a bad idea | 17:37 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: or bootstrap-config | 17:38 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, it's still a bit risky in the same way Conn.Environ is, but it's better than before | 17:38 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, perfect | 17:38 |
| natefinch | I'm getting a weird test failure in state/service_test.go in TestUpdateConfigSettings | 17:39 |
| natefinch | code that is no where near anything I've touched | 17:39 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, validate and complete it OAOO, record it locally so we can finish bootstrap nicely, subsequently stick to changing the state-servers field and fall back to bootstrap-config just in case it offers a save for a screwed situation | 17:39 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: i could imagine a command, say clear-bootstrap-info, which would delete the local bootstrap config | 17:40 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: although it's probably unnecessary | 17:40 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, I'm not sure it deserves a UI | 17:40 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, anyone who can be trusted to run it can handle deleting a few lines;p | 17:40 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: yeah | 17:40 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: what *might* be nice though is a way of exporting the file without the bootstrap-config | 17:41 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, yeah, I think that definitely deserves a UI | 17:41 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, import/export environment basically | 17:41 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: yeah | 17:42 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, but I think that vocab's taken so we should think of something else | 17:42 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: endpoint | 17:42 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: export-endpoint, import-endpoint ? | 17:42 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, I'm wondering whether it's more like an identity almost | 17:43 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: it would be great if it contained the environ's UUID | 17:43 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, that's a good point | 17:44 |
| natefinch | mgz, fwereade, rogpeppe, dimitern: help with this test failure? I don't know where it's coming from - http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/6155445/ | 17:44 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, we do something annoying like defer its creation to bootstrap-state now, don't we? | 17:44 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: tbh it would be nice if the UUID was generated at bootstrap time | 17:44 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: yeah | 17:44 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: i argued against that at the time :-) | 17:44 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, well forseen | 17:44 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, eh, we can always add that to the info file, along with the state-servers, rather than jam it into config | 17:45 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: that's true | 17:45 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, just pick it up a bit later | 17:45 |
| dimitern | natefinch, probably you need to merge trunk and frank's changes for updating default/empty settings values? | 17:46 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: although it would be nicer to verify that the other end has that UUID rather than taking it for granted we're talking to the right one | 17:46 |
| natefinch | dimitern: hmm... I did just merge trunk.. let me double check | 17:46 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, agreed that Prepare-time UUID generation would be nicer | 17:47 |
| jam | rogpeppe: any chance to not double space the cert? | 17:47 |
| rogpeppe | jam: that's just how goyaml produces multiline strings | 17:48 |
| rogpeppe | jam: if you wanted to patch goyaml... :-) | 17:48 |
| jam | rogpeppe: is it part of the yaml spec? in that if you don't double space you end up with everything on-one-line ? | 17:50 |
| rogpeppe | jam: inside single quotes, yes | 17:50 |
| jam | rogpeppe: you can always use a custom type with a MarshalYAML or whatever the func is. | 17:50 |
| rogpeppe | jam: yaml has the most abstruse quoting rules ever | 17:50 |
| rogpeppe | jam: that can't help us, unfortunately | 17:50 |
| rogpeppe | jam: because MarshalYAML returns interface{} containing values which will be marshalled according to the usual yaml marshalling rules | 17:51 |
| rogpeppe | jam: GetYAML, i mean | 17:51 |
| * rogpeppe has reached eod | 17:52 | |
| natefinch | dimitern: all set. looks like it was old cruft from go install that needed to be rebuilt. | 17:53 |
| dimitern | natefinch, ah, yeah - we keep bumping into that | 17:54 |
| dimitern | fwereade, any chance of looking at https://codereview.appspot.com/13916043 ? | 17:54 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: seems like we have a plan | 17:55 |
| fwereade | dimitern, sorry, got lost on the stack, doing it now | 17:55 |
| natefinch | dimitern: yeah, I've hit it before, just didn't think of it this time... I just try never to do go install anymore... it's too fraught with problems like that | 17:55 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, I think so | 17:55 |
| fwereade | rogpeppe, thanks | 17:55 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: cool. | 17:55 |
| rogpeppe | fwereade: i'm happy. | 17:55 |
| dimitern | natefinch, I tend to always do go install in cmd/juju and cmd/jujud before doing a live test with --upload-tools | 17:55 |
| rogpeppe | g'night all | 17:56 |
| jam | natefinch: I always use "cd cmd/juju; go build; ./juju ..." which means it won't ever find "jujud" next to it :) | 17:56 |
| fwereade | dimitern, nice, LGTM | 17:56 |
| natefinch | jam: yeah, I've taken to the go build; ./juju thing too | 17:57 |
| dimitern | fwereade, cheers, the next one coming up shortly | 17:57 |
| fwereade | dimitern, awesome, I am workecueing and will be around for a bit | 17:58 |
| dimitern | fwereade, nice! :) | 17:59 |
| natefinch | mgz, fwereade: updated the maas-tags stuff with some more tests and bug fixes and now we handle nil tags vs empty list of tags properly https://codereview.appspot.com/13802045/ | 17:59 |
| dimitern | fwereade, and the last one https://codereview.appspot.com/13919043 | 18:09 |
| fwereade | natefinch, LGTM | 18:36 |
| fwereade | dimitern, looking | 18:36 |
| dimitern | fwereade, thanks! | 18:37 |
| fwereade | dimitern, natefinch: if you're both around, I think we may want to verify that we can still deploy a container on maas with the changes | 18:38 |
| fwereade | and I believe natefinch to have something resembling reliable maas access | 18:38 |
| fwereade | dimitern, pending verification, LGTM | 18:41 |
| dimitern | natefinch, you just need "juju deploy wordpres --to lxc:0" or something and make sure it works | 18:41 |
| dimitern | fwereade, but natefinch will need to pull my branch, right? | 18:41 |
| * dimitern brb | 18:42 | |
| dimitern | fwereade, you a maas live test specifically? | 18:53 |
| fwereade | dimitern, that'sd where we need that providsioner | 18:54 |
| fwereade | sorry knuckle typing | 18:54 |
| fwereade | pig fat | 18:54 |
| dimitern | :) | 18:54 |
| dimitern | I can do a live tests on ec2 or the local provider (or both) tomorrow | 18:54 |
| fwereade | ec2 runs no lxc proisioner now I Thought | 18:55 |
| dimitern | so local provider then? | 18:55 |
| dimitern | I think ec2 has it though | 18:56 |
| dimitern | I've seen it start in the logs while live testing iirc | 18:56 |
| fwereade | dimitern, hmm, maybe that has not landed yet | 18:56 |
| fwereade | dimitern, see whether it does run on ec2 | 18:57 |
| fwereade | dimitern, if it does, add a container and check it's deployed sanely even if not actually addressable | 18:57 |
| fwereade | dimitern, that'd be good enough for me I think | 18:58 |
| dimitern | fwereade, ok, will do first thing tomorrow | 18:58 |
| fwereade | dimitern, great, tyvm | 18:59 |
| natefinch | dimitern, fwereade: sorry, had to step out. I can try pulling dimiter's branch and test it out | 19:28 |
| fwereade | natefinch, no worries, and only if it's convenient, we can do it tomorrow as easily | 19:29 |
| fwereade | I'm about to be off myself | 19:29 |
| natefinch | fwereade: figured. I'll actually see if I can just add everyone to the maas host's trusted_keys so we can all use this virtual maas environment | 19:29 |
| fwereade | natefinch, oo, that'd be handy | 19:30 |
| fwereade | natefinch, thanks | 19:30 |
| natefinch | fwereade: welcome | 19:39 |
| gary_poster | hello world. I'm using juju core 14.1 on saucy and can't get local lxc environ to work. I had it working fine on another machine with saucy a week ago, but not working here. the lxc machine never goes past pending after 30 min, 45 min, 1 hr. excerpt from local log of most recent attempt (now 7 minutes into attempt) is here: http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/6156103/ . My environments.yaml at this point in my attempts i | 20:49 |
| gary_poster | s entirely barebones: only a local environment with an admin-secret. Can anyone help? thumper, you around, despite incredibly early time for you? | 20:49 |
| gary_poster | To be clear, this is the kind of status I see: http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/6156113/ | 20:50 |
| thumper | hi gary_poster | 20:51 |
| thumper | it is the start of my normal work day :) | 20:51 |
| gary_poster | hey thumper. oh cool...I think :-) what time is it? | 20:51 |
| thumper | just before 9am | 20:52 |
| gary_poster | oh cool, not too bad | 20:52 |
| thumper | next week I will be 1 more hour closer to you | 20:52 |
| thumper | as we go to UTC+13 | 20:52 |
| gary_poster | ah, right, then IIRC we get even closer when we do our time shift | 20:52 |
| thumper | gary_poster: can you post the log from ~/.juju/local/logs/ | 20:52 |
| gary_poster | sure | 20:52 |
| thumper | gary_poster: yes | 20:52 |
| gary_poster | thumper, http://paste.ubuntu.com/6156123/ | 20:53 |
| gary_poster | that is local/log/machine-0.log . there is no machine-1 fwiw | 20:54 |
| * thumper nods | 20:54 | |
| thumper | have a look in /var/lib/juju/containers | 20:54 |
| thumper | there should be a directory there gary-local-machine-1 | 20:55 |
| gary_poster | there is | 20:55 |
| thumper | in there there should be two log files | 20:55 |
| thumper | can you pastebin them? | 20:56 |
| gary_poster | on it | 20:56 |
| gary_poster | container.log http://paste.ubuntu.com/6156133/ | 20:56 |
| gary_poster | console.log (as root) http://paste.ubuntu.com/6156140/ | 20:57 |
| gary_poster | thumper, ^^ | 20:58 |
| thumper | gary_poster: yeah, looking | 20:58 |
| gary_poster | cool, thx | 20:58 |
| thumper | I think this is a key one: cloud-init-nonet waiting 120 seconds for a network device. | 20:59 |
| thumper | cloud-init-nonet gave up waiting for a network device. | 20:59 |
| thumper | also there seems to be some issues with the container.log | 21:00 |
| thumper | perhaps lxc in saucy has changed something | 21:00 |
| thumper | will need to follow up with serge | 21:00 |
| gary_poster | ack thanks thumper. thank you for looking. Not blocked here. anything else you need from my machine? | 21:01 |
| thumper | perhaps apt-cache policy lxc | 21:01 |
| gary_poster | thumper, http://paste.ubuntu.com/6156168/ | 21:03 |
| gary_poster | running away | 21:03 |
| gary_poster | thanks and talk to you later | 21:03 |
| thumper | kk | 21:04 |
| wallyworld_ | sinzui: hello, did you want to catch up? | 21:51 |
| sinzui | wallyworld_, yeah | 21:52 |
| wallyworld_ | mumble hates me at the moment | 21:52 |
| wallyworld_ | so a hangout? | 21:52 |
| wallyworld_ | https://plus.google.com/hangouts/_/57e2c830e5a49e266ebc4dbeef8b459386dbf5bf | 21:52 |
| * sinzui gets drink | 21:53 | |
| * thumper goes for a walk to think through some issues (juju related) | 22:44 | |
| === thumper is now known as thumper-dogwalk | ||
| === thumper-dogwalk is now known as thumper | ||
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!