Quoting Guilhem Moulin (2020-12-08 12:33:15) > On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 at 18:23:54 +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > > A certificate renewal endede like this: > > […] > > Running notification command `/bin/systemctl reload apache2` > > accept: Invalid argument at /usr/libexec/lacme/webserver line 80. > > […] > > Certificate is now updated at https://live.homebase.dk/ so > > apparently the operation succeeded despite the odd message. > > Added some thoughts at https://bugs.debian.org/976734#10 (leaving the > decision whether to merge these to you).
I prefer to track these issues separately: The confusing but harmless chatter here, and the confusing messages for a fatal error at 976734. (to be honest, I had forgotten this bugreport when filing the newer one, and only in hindsight, _after_ my follow-ups to the newer one does it make sense to me to keep them separate) > > I should note that the local host runs Debian unstable and the > > remote runs stable Debian, so lacme and lacme-accountd is not same > > version. If that causes this issue, then perhaps lacme could check > > protocol version and provide a more meaningful warning/error > > message. > > They already exchange protocol version :-) IPC schema has never been > modified since the first release, so lacme-accountd(1) is currently > compatible with any version of lacme(8). This might change in the > future, but I plan to preserve some reasonable backward compatibility. Cool! Would be helpful if you documented that detail. Maybe related to that mention that you make no promises for future IPC stability (if that's the case) - still I think documenting _past_ stability is helpful. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
signature.asc
Description: signature
