[00:39] is it possible for a controller to claim control of a pre-existing model? say the instance that is hosting the original controller is accidentally deleted [00:41] timClicks: no [00:41] timClicks: the only way is the very manual db restore/disaster recovery steps that are noted somewhere that jam put together [00:42] understood, that's what I thought [01:25] oh wallyworld PTAL https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/10784 - update-creds changes [01:49] anastasiamac: lgtm [01:49] \o/ [02:04] hpidcock: i left a couple more questions [02:42] wallyworld: I think that's it. Thanks-you for all the reviewing [02:44] no worries, will look soon [03:06] babbageclunk: for whenever https://github.com/juju/description/pull/63 [03:11] hpidcock: let's land it. looks good, we can deal with any fallout when we test over the next few days etc [04:14] wallyworld: approved [04:14] ty [04:14] will fix the import func as suggested [05:45] anastasiamac: that bug does look legit - destroy-model should cleanup everything before returning [05:48] wallyworld: it's enclear whether the 2 given commands are run in parallel.. it did not look like there was a wait for command to come back [05:48] wallyworld: anyway i need to talk to u when u can [05:48] he says they run one after the other [05:48] and destroy-model blocks [05:48] helping in #juju atm [05:49] no he says that remove-cloud blocks [05:49] wallyworld: ^^ [05:50] remove-model blocks also [05:50] it counts down the stuff that is being removed [05:51] wallyworld: let's talk - there is no 'remove-model' and he is not saying that destroy-model blocks but that the following 'remove-cloud' does not succeed.. m not sure u've read the bug [06:04] i meant destroy-model, i have read it, was a typo :-) [06:04] anastasiamac: can talk now until i get pinged again [06:04] stdup? [06:05] ok [06:42] wallyworld: PTAL https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/10786 -add-cloud exclusivity and go1.13 'fix' as discussed [06:42] ok [06:45] lgtm, ty [06:47] \o/ u r a review ninja! [08:29] anyone for a really, really small one? https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/10782, additionally do we have other places to add them? [08:37] nammn_de: Does it need test changes? See https://discourse.jujucharms.com/t/adding-new-regions-to-clouds-yaml/1741 [08:38] manadart: ohhh, I keep forgetting to search in discourse, I will search for that :) [08:58] manadart: just looked at the test, no does not seem to be the case. Seems like we removed those tests from there. The linked e.g. PR adds test to a place which was removed in later commit. Only need to update jenkins AFAICT [09:02] nammn_de: OK. [09:08] manadart: juju bot only failed for windows. Some flaky tests (?) [09:22] now that was confusing me for some time. https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/10787 2 link updates in the readme [09:23] stickupkid: around? [09:23] nammn_de, always [09:23] stickupkid: now thats the spirit :D! [09:24] nammn_de: regarding adding support for windows and catalina. Should be done with the pr we added, right? Catalina was added before and windows by us both [09:24] just to make sure I did not overlook something [09:24] nammn_de, correct [09:24] stickupkid: cool [09:24] nammn_de, nope [10:29] manadart: I have been looking into the peergrouper code for the address equality code that you mentioned in 10750 but can't seem to find it. Can you help me track it down? [10:37] achilleasa: Looks like the old comparison was removed from the peergrouper and it just does reflect.DeepEqual. This is on SpaceAddresses anyway, so it's a different type to here. [10:38] manadart: I agree that the comparison code should proabbly live in core/network [11:04] jam: I have pushed two new commits to 10750 which address some of your comments. Can you take a look? [11:18] achilleasa: looking [11:23] achilleasa: did you find anything for comparing lists of addresses? [11:25] jam: not yet... the code in my PR is the same as the code used by the current implementation [11:34] achilleasa: reviewd [12:19] achilleasa: review pls https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/10783 [12:20] hml: looking [12:21] hml: got a few min for a quick ho? [12:21] achilleasa: sure, meet you in daily [12:37] am i doing something wrong? How do I set my client to run on the same version as the one I am planning to deploy ? I am using build-agent and have compiled before. Still got the err msg. "agent binary 2.7-rc1 not compatible with bootstrap client 2.7-beta1" [12:40] hml: approved [12:40] achilleasa: ty! [12:41] nvm stupid me... I thought make would include go-install.. [13:46] nammn_de: what QA steps are needed for this pr? [13:48] jam: Hey, can I get confirmation from you that relation IDs are in fact unique integers and that the `{relation_name}:{id}` form is just for informational purposes on the CLI? Will the API and CLI always accept a bare int? [14:00] hml: oh i forgot to add them. My bad, let me quick add them. but it's just deploying them into the new regions. [14:01] hml: updated descriptin [14:01] hml: can you do a quick CR on https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/10788? [14:01] achilleasa: sure, once i’m done with the current [14:02] hml: no rush [14:02] goooood morning [14:04] hml, CR'd 10781 [14:04] stickupkid: ty! [14:15] nammn_de: i’m unable to bootstrap to one of the new regions [14:15] nammn_de: it should be showing up with juju regions , but they are not. [14:17] hey guys, Im having issues with networking with LXD. I have NAT configured, and I have a network setup, with a interface configured as well. I can ping containers from the host machine, but I cant reach the same hosts with the same network from another node. Can anyone help me out? This doesnt make any sense. [14:18] preferrably Id like to just let MaaS be the DHCP server, and let maas issue the lxd containers their IPs [14:18] hml: which region does not work? Both work for me. They should show if you dont have a local cloud.yaml file. Else they will not fallback to the yaml file provided by juju [14:18] nammn_de: neither [14:20] hml: here updated description and expected output https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/10782. As long you have a clouds.yaml under /.local/share/juju , juju will not respect the fallbackoption and use the one defined there. Could that be the case? [14:21] cory_fu: the CLI immediately strips out just the integer portion for the rest of the internal operations. I don't see that changing in the near future, at least. [14:21] jam: Great, thanks. That's what I thought. [14:21] "unique" in that both sides of a relation see the same integer, but every relation is a different integer [14:21] nammn_de: HO? [14:22] hml: sure comin in 1 min [14:58] nammn_de: approved [14:58] hml: thanks! [15:13] hml rick_h: related bug description https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju/+bug/1849509 I tried to make it a bit more elaborate [15:13] Bug #1849509: Juju cloud update and fallback precedence [15:37] manadart: the unit manifold allows my to fetch an environs.Environ instance. Is it somehow possible to get a NetworkingEnviron instead? [15:39] I want to access NetworkInterfaces like we do in networkingcommon and handle NotSupported for providers that don't expose it [16:13] manadart: nvm, I think I 've got it [23:38] wallyworld: PTAL https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/10789 - last in series ;D [23:38] ok, in a sec [23:38] wallyworld: of course, none of this is 'look mmediately' :D