[Citadel Development] Re: Really just a commit test.
But, we are here and do read. Sun Jun 02 2024 15:47:41 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar Subject: Re: Really just a commit test. Ok there we go. I know only a few people read this room
[Citadel Development] Re: START_CHAT_MODE is renamed to SEND_THEN_RECV
Understood, was just a passing thought since i live in the 'big world' and first thought is always scale.. Many of our apps get 100k + connections all day long.
[Citadel Development] Re: START_CHAT_MODE is renamed to SEND_THEN_RECV
That is a hard one. But keeping them separate might help with scalability? Mon Jan 08 2024 12:42:10 EST from IGnatius T Foobar Subject: Re: START_CHAT_MODE is renamed to SEND_THEN_RECV I've been thinking lately that it might begin to make sense to put the web server (really, the web API) directly into Citadel Server. Since it's now a web API and no longer a user interface, it could be an improvement. *shrug*
[Citadel Development] Re: view_mail.js: more improvements to mail forwarding
While most of us like the old interface just fine ( unless we are stuck with a phone, and dont feel like doing imap ), i know it does turn off some new comers. Might not hurt to do something like that so they know the future is not vaporware... They might stick around, or at least make plans to come back. Tue Dec 12 2023 22:50:56 EST from IGnatius T Foobar Subject: Re: view_mail.js: more improvements to mail forwarding I can add one of those corny "preview our new user experience" buttons.
[Citadel Development] Re: serv_extensions.c: style cleanup from 30,000 feet
lol
[Citadel Development] Re: Removed background and restart from citserver.
While i am super rusty, if we need a non-prod FBSD install to beat on, i can always prop-up a VM. I installed it on that 'box of crap' not long ago out of desperation, and enough memories did come back so i was able to get it to install ok, and some add-ons. Tho i wouldn't be able to use it for its purpose in life due to some missing python stuff :(. But then it promptly crashed under load. .Just like Linux/windows does .
[Citadel Development] Re: Master: citserver coredump on Shutdown
yay
[Citadel Development] Re: Build System
I could be wrong, but when you first get here, it defaults to the last room seen by a non-logged in person. When you login, it stays there. i always just go to the room list, to see what is new, for me.
[Citadel Development] (null)
Does to me. Tue Aug 08 2023 06:15:30 PM EDT from IGnatius T Foobar Does that sound acceptable to you all? .
[Citadel Development] Re: y creashRe: Database Recovery Tools
I was mostly teasing on that. "get off my lawn" sort of thing :) Tho as i scanned thru it seemed like one of the no-SQL sorts of things. Tue Aug 08 2023 09:23:09 AM EDT from IGnatius T Foobar Subject: Re: y creashRe: Database Recovery Tools The only thing that's "all the rage with the kids" is *calling* it "NoSQL". Berkeley DB has been a simple key/value data store for 30 years. And until recently it's worked fine for us.
[Citadel Development] Re: y creashRe: Database Recovery Tools
One of those new fangled no-sql things that is all the rage with the kids these days? Mon Aug 07 2023 10:44:40 AM EDT from IGnatius T Foobar Subject: Re: y creashRe: Database Recovery Tools To be honest I'm leaning towards LMDB,
[Citadel Development] Re: y creashRe: Database Recovery Tools
With as long as it was gone, i figured it was not intentional. :( I know i cant contribute code from lack of time and i'm so out of practice, but SQLite might be an easy and safe replacement? ( unless you go with the total abstraction model then its academic ) Mon Aug 07 2023 09:56:00 AM EDT from IGnatius T Foobar Subject: Re: y creashRe: Database Recovery Tools Aaaand Uncensored crashed last night and took the database with it. I don't know what the deal is with this; we've been running Berkeley DB for more than 20 years and it's never been this unstable before. But now it's a liability and I am afraid that some people will begin shying away from Citadel because of it -- if they're not already. It has to go.
[Citadel Development] (null)
Got home quite a bit earlier than expected. Decided to set things up before i head out again.. So its up and running. Details sent via email. Sat Jul 22 2023 10:19:29 PM EDT from IGnatius T Foobar That is more than sufficient, thanks!
[Citadel Development] (null)
Let me set a box up tomorrow for you when i get back home. A RK3588 with 8G ram ok? Couple hundred gig SSD. We can work out connection details via PM after i get it built. Sat Jul 22 2023 12:28:26 PM EDT from IGnatius T Foobar I would certainly welcome having a chance to test the build on that target and see how it goes.
[Citadel Development] (null)
No. After the break in and later attacks i wiped everything, even backups as i didnt trust them after that. Would need to be a fresh install, which i doubt would be a 'good' test since it would be mostly empty. That is why i was still offering up access here, you could beat on it as much as needed for testing between platforms. ( or i could mail you a Jetson or something :) ). Sat Jul 22 2023 09:30:18 AM EDT from IGnatius T Foobar Do you have a live system you can use as a test of source data? If so, the most excellent test would be (after I get ctdldump and ctdlload into the build) to dump your system, load the dump on another system, and go through it carefully to see if the source system was reproduced with 100% fidelity.
[Citadel Development] (null)
i wondered what was going on. Figured it was not just an update. While i have no users for load testing, if you want someone to at least test installs and basic ops, yell. I can do both x86 and arm64 ( doubt arm32 is worth trying at this point ). I could do Risc-v too, but i doubt all the tools are there to make that work yet. And as always, the offer to prop up an ARM machine for you to have direct access to via SSH ( or vpn ) is on the table. Fri Jul 21 2023 06:10:22 PM EDT from IGnatius T Foobar F*g hell. I had to restore from a backup this afternoon because my database bit the dust. Looks like it's time to accelerate the replacement of Berkeley DB. ctdldump/ctdlload is functionally complete, and we can start testing it. I'm also thinking that maybe we want to split the server core and the database handler into two separate processes, so if something happens to citserver it doesn't whack the database along with it. This is something we'd get naturally with an external SQL server, I know. *sigh*
[Citadel Development] Notes on new build system
Didn't want to put it in the news room, but IG : if you ever need access to other ARM hardware beyond a PI, let me know and ill get you a VPN account or something to use. I also have plenty of VM space if you need throwaway *BSD to test with. and wait, just Linux BSD? What about 9Front ??? :) ( just teasing ) I also do have functioning RiscV hardware i can put out there, if its of interest. ( still lower end hardware just a dual core/8g ram, but its functional now at least )
[Citadel Development] (null)
I did not try any migration, but running the container seemed to work out well, with my incomplete testing. Mon Aug 30 2021 11:27:09 PM EDT from IGnatius T Foobar Well this is interesting. I made a copy of the database for my production system (Uncensored) and am currently running it as a 32-bit container on a 64-bit system. Now I don't have to convert my database, and thanks to the magic of automatic cross-platform builds, I don't even have to work hard at it. Yum! This means that I can be in production on the new Docker-powered version that much sooner.
[Citadel Development] Re: [SCM] Configuration for building a Citadel container in Docker branch master updated. f8944e3483bb27625c55ac6909b008e842d4675a
For me, you just saying that plans had not changed was assurance enough :)
[Citadel Development] Re: New Docker Images
Well the multi arch pull fails for 64bit as it cant find it in the manifest. Sort of what i expected to be honest. Unlike forcing a specific architecture during the pull where it just complains ( but runs ) here it says "screw you its not there" and hard stop. ( in my case its "linux/arm64/v8" but would be different for other 64bit boards depending on the CPU revision. ) I realize you are not officially supporting us 64 bit ARM guys yet, but at least forcing the 32bit pull works, so unless you switch it over to only multi, might be worth adding it to the documentation. Mon Aug 23 2021 01:27:06 PM EDT from IGnatius T Foobar Subject: Re: New Docker Images Might as well have this conversation here. First things first: I figured out how to do a "multiarch" build, so there will no longer be different tags for different architectures. "latest" now supports AMD64, i386, and ARMv7. I built a script to push nightly builds, so hopefully we've got a bit of a CI/CD pipeline started. So anyway, this means you can now test on any host by doing this: docker run -it --rm --network=host citadeldotorg/citadel The above command will run an instance of Citadel that is completely ephemeral; this means your database will cease to exist when it exits. Perfect for testing. To run it persistently you have to mount a persistent volume as indicated on the web site. To check for a new version, just do: docker pull citadeldotorg/citadel And there are no plans to discontinue Easy Install.
[Citadel Development] Re: (running-docker-on-proxmox)
I heard of people trying to run docker on lxc. Didn't work out too well for them. :) Tue Aug 24 2021 05:50:31 PM EDT from IGnatius T Foobar Subject: Re: (running-docker-on-proxmox) Yes, and it appears that the easiest way to do that is just to run an ordinary Ubuntu VM on your ProxMox cluster and then run Docker Engine on that. Basically just bring up a clean OS build and then follow the instructions at https://www.citadel.org/docker.html to deploy Citadel. It ought to be ridiculously easy.
[Citadel Development] (null)
you can always run docker on the host, or in VMs ( a better idea I think ) , but last i looked, it could not manage them from their interface. I know people have asked for that.. Its all lxc ( which was being discussed elsewhere too.. lots of overlap ) Tue Aug 24 2021 02:56:21 AM EDT from ParanoidDelusions I didn't pay a lot of attention, but doesn't Proxmox support Docker containers? Or is it just Kurbernettes - or whatever... I understand the basic concept of these ideas, but it wasn't something on my radar. Is it something that I can easily test under Proxmox? That is supposed to be the advantage of containers, right? They're very simple to throw up?
[Citadel Development] Re: New Docker Images
Cool. Makes it easier for our side of the fence. Ill try one of those pulls tomorrow. Mon Aug 23 2021 01:27:06 PM EDT from IGnatius T Foobar Subject: Re: New Docker Images First things first: I figured out how to do a "multiarch" build, so there will no longer be different tags for different architectures.
[Citadel Development] New Docker Images
Not real sure where to put this .. its not really support, and i dont want to clutter up the announcement area. But early observations is that it works real well. I setup docker on a 64bit arm just to test this out, and it installed and ran just fine. I did get a complaint about 32/64 bit architecture mismatch but i expected that. And i expected it to run afterward, it did. I dont pretend to have tested *everything* but i did do basics. Setup accounts, added removed rooms, sent mails around ( internal.. ) chat.. etc. Not tried connecting from something like Thunderbird, yet. Will try that tomorrow. Curious if there is a formal regression testing list that you guys use. Perhaps if we all used that same ' testing plan' we would have more through testing of releases other than random ' i tested some stuff '? Just a thought. I know this is the 'preferred route' going forward, but i do hope the plans didnt change about keeping easy install availble. That is still useful for people like on *bsd or new architectures, like RISC-V.. ( or just people who are not fans of docker )
