On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 09:38:56PM -0400, Bob Doolittle wrote: > [email protected] wrote: >> On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 12:41:18PM -0500, Shawn Walker wrote: >> >>> Neelu Roy wrote: >>> >>>> Hello Shawn/Bob >>>> >>>> We had already set http_proxy="http://username:passw...@proxy:8080/";. >>>> Also tried setting https_proxy too. >>>> >>>> Even on setting https_proxy, set-authority fails with below error: >>>> >>>> sm...@sunray-21:~# pfexec pkg set-authority -k >>>> /var/pkg/ssl/OpenSolaris_standard_support.key.pem -c >>>> /var/pkg/ssl/OpenSolaris_standard_support.certificate.pem -O >>>> https://pkg.sun.com/opensolaris/support opensolaris.org >>>> >>>> pkg: The origin URIs for 'opensolaris.org' do not appear to point >>>> to a valid pkg server. >>>> Please check the server's address and client's network configuration. >>>> Additional details: >>>> Unable to contact valid package server: >>>> https://pkg.sun.com/opensolaris/support/ >>>> Encountered the following error(s): >>>> Transport errors encountered when trying to contact depot server. >>>> Reported the following errors: >>>> Could not retrieve versions from 'opensolaris.org' >>>> Exception: str:global name 'host' is not defined >>>> repr:<exceptions.NameError instance at 0x84e9eec> >>>> >>> Actually, this looks like an unexpected error from one of the >>> underlying libraries we use. >>> >>> I've CC'd the transport engineer. >>> >> >> I'll need more information about the configuration, otherwise it's hard >> to figure out what's going on. >> >> What's your version of libcurl? What's your OS version? Do you have >> pycurl built? Did you build pkg yourself, or install it from somewhere? >> What version of pkg(5) are you using? Is this problem reproducible on >> other machines? What's your network configuration? etc, etc. >> > I can answer a few questions. The engineers and machine are in India and > they're off Monday so probably won't respond immediately with more > detail. > > They have a system with OS2009.06 so stock 111b and are changing > publisher to /support. Nothing custom built. They probably have SRSS 4.2 > installed but that shouldn't affect the basic network configuration. > They will likely have added the DHCP packages. NWAM will have been > disabled so they are using a static address with > network/physical:default and probably manually-configured DNS. > > However I have successfully made this transition with exactly the above > configuration and didn't run into problems so it's a bit mysterious.
I find this a bit odd, since the new transport wasn't integrated until b118. If they're using 111b, this should either be the old transport, or they're using a newer client than 111b. The output of pkg version should clear this up, though. If we're not able to determine the problem from examining the configuration, it may be necessary to modify the code that's hitting this problem so that it prints the actual stack trace that's casuing the NameError. -j _______________________________________________ pkg-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
