Juju stable 1.25.5 is proposed for release

2016-04-07 Thread Curtis Hovey-Canonical
# juju-core 1.25.5 A new proposed stable release of Juju, juju-core 1.25.5, is now available. This release may replace version 1.25.3 on Tuesday April 12. ## Getting Juju juju-core 1.25.5 is available for Xenial and backported to earlier series in the following PPA:

Re: LXD v2.0.0-rc8 does not work with Juju v2.0-beta3

2016-04-07 Thread Reed O'Brien
np On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 10:31 AM, roger peppe wrote: > On 7 April 2016 at 17:34, Reed O'Brien wrote: > >> Do you want to NAT the IPv4 traffic? n > > > > You do want to NAT the traffic, unless you have routing explicitly setup. > > Ah,

Re: LXD v2.0.0-rc8 does not work with Juju v2.0-beta3

2016-04-07 Thread roger peppe
On 7 April 2016 at 17:34, Reed O'Brien wrote: >> Do you want to NAT the IPv4 traffic? n > > You do want to NAT the traffic, unless you have routing explicitly setup. Ah, thanks. I knew it must be something stupid like that. It now bootstraps and works OK, yay! Thanks

Re: LXD v2.0.0-rc8 does not work with Juju v2.0-beta3

2016-04-07 Thread Reed O'Brien
> Do you want to NAT the IPv4 traffic? n You do want to NAT the traffic, unless you have routing explicitly setup. On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 9:17 AM, roger peppe wrote: > OK, thanks, that gets me further. I'd used the netmask from the > example value in the default

Re: LXD v2.0.0-rc8 does not work with Juju v2.0-beta3

2016-04-07 Thread roger peppe
OK, thanks, that gets me further. I'd used the netmask from the example value in the default /etc/default/lxd-bridge - I assumed they were the same format, as the values were. ## IPv4 netmask (e.g. 255.255.255.0) Now my bootstrap is stuck further on while installing cpu-checker:

Re: LXD v2.0.0-rc8 does not work with Juju v2.0-beta3

2016-04-07 Thread Reed O'Brien
I think you need to enter the CIDR netmask as a bit len, e.g. 24 rather than as 255.255.255.0. See https://github.com/reedobrien/juju-notes/blob/master/writing-a-ci-test.md and the section on LXD for my personal notes about a working config. HTH, Reed On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 8:14 AM, roger peppe

Re: LXD v2.0.0-rc8 does not work with Juju v2.0-beta3

2016-04-07 Thread roger peppe
I tried it. I get this error after typing in lots of ipv4 details: /var/lib/dpkg/info/lxd.postinst: 8: /var/lib/dpkg/info/lxd.postinst: arithmetic expression: expecting ')': " 5 - (255.255.255.0 / 8) " My full interaction was as follows: http://paste.ubuntu.com/15671384/ On 7 April 2016 at

Re: LXD v2.0.0-rc8 does not work with Juju v2.0-beta3

2016-04-07 Thread John Meinel
Did you run dpkg-reconfigure lxd ? That's what I ran once I installed the new lxd package and it seemed to get things working. Tycho added some helpful prompts as part of "juju bootstrap" to point users in the right direction if LXD looks to be improperly configured.

Re: LXD v2.0.0-rc8 does not work with Juju v2.0-beta3

2016-04-07 Thread roger peppe
To add to this conversation, I have encountered this issue today and have been unable to resolve it so far in the limited time I've been able to spend on it. I'm running on Trusty; I have the new version of lxd and the latest version of Juju tip. In my case, the issue seems to be that my lcdbr0

Re: Unable to kill-controller

2016-04-07 Thread Aaron Bentley
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 2016-04-07 12:40 AM, John Meinel wrote: > 2. We move CI towards making kill-controller fail the test suite. > If destroy doesn't do everything they want, then we have a bug and > it should be telling developers that. e.g. exit status 0 = "I

Re: New juju in ubuntu

2016-04-07 Thread Martin Packman
On 06/04/2016, Stuart Bishop wrote: > > How do our plugins know what version of juju is in play? Can they > assume that the 'juju' binary found on the path is the juju that > invoked the plugin, or is there some other way to tell using > environment variables or such?

Re: New juju in ubuntu

2016-04-07 Thread Stuart Bishop
On 7 April 2016 at 16:46, roger peppe wrote: > On 7 April 2016 at 10:17, Stuart Bishop wrote: >> On 7 April 2016 at 16:03, roger peppe wrote: >>> On 7 April 2016 at 09:38, Tim Penhey

Re: New juju in ubuntu

2016-04-07 Thread roger peppe
On 7 April 2016 at 10:17, Stuart Bishop wrote: > On 7 April 2016 at 16:03, roger peppe wrote: >> On 7 April 2016 at 09:38, Tim Penhey wrote: >>> We could probably set an environment variable for the plugin called

Re: New juju in ubuntu

2016-04-07 Thread Stuart Bishop
On 7 April 2016 at 16:03, roger peppe wrote: > On 7 April 2016 at 09:38, Tim Penhey wrote: >> We could probably set an environment variable for the plugin called >> JUJU_BIN that is the juju that invoked it. >> >> Wouldn't be too hard. > > How

Re: New juju in ubuntu

2016-04-07 Thread roger peppe
On 7 April 2016 at 09:38, Tim Penhey wrote: > We could probably set an environment variable for the plugin called > JUJU_BIN that is the juju that invoked it. > > Wouldn't be too hard. How does that stop old plugins failing because the new juju is trying to use them?

Re: New juju in ubuntu

2016-04-07 Thread Tim Penhey
We could probably set an environment variable for the plugin called JUJU_BIN that is the juju that invoked it. Wouldn't be too hard. Tim On 07/04/16 17:25, Stuart Bishop wrote: > On 7 April 2016 at 03:55, Marco Ceppi wrote: >> >> On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 10:07 AM

Re: Unable to kill-controller

2016-04-07 Thread roger peppe
My 2p: FWIW I also would have no idea which was stronger, kill-controller or destroy-controller. Assuming we do really want a separate command, a variant of "destroy-controller" might be more intuitive, e.g. "destroy-controller-with-prejudice", "destroy-controller-regardless"... If fact I think