From ntl@pobox.com Wed May 27 18:40:23 2015 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (pb-smtp1.int.icgroup.com [208.72.237.35]) by underdog.stansell.org (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id t4RIeKbK009478 for ; Wed, 27 May 2015 18:40:22 GMT Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7560E55F88 for ; Wed, 27 May 2015 14:40:16 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=mime-version :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; s=sasl; bh=aiceXj R1kVzNjnXJUN+W/n/zof8=; b=MPviPGxUjsCOBdAZrtQlprYTL7hiLoQ1Z+GLVX yQmxZvTbfIM+kLoYEr646/QHBCRfoz+L9x8uwOL3tiNt5DqttHQIaRSDOiLIfMXF xxSsxeFQoUTZUH3b5tCoznlCkaedCukMHxTit+vfp7pAYz5lB6C8tyLUG/rbjf/k MC7oc= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=mime-version :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b= VMCBCqjPNScJUved4Z/t/MB2Q5f0XXDyT1CPbs0SIwPQdg1B3rF4Gq3EjMR81PG3 9mDhqBrnsJsUXI24ZmaeUb/M1Tz4oN6zgaFQE1L0rFKzO345rRsha5SyPk4TTa1V Jw0ZkZQ1xWJZoOFFDD1HXsJp1hawaTSmohiqTggmLOY= Received: from pb-smtp1.int.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EF4255F87 for ; Wed, 27 May 2015 14:40:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail-ie0-f181.google.com (unknown [209.85.223.181]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1753455F86 for ; Wed, 27 May 2015 14:40:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: by ieczm2 with SMTP id zm2so20671786iec.1 for ; Wed, 27 May 2015 11:40:15 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.107.162.147 with SMTP id l141mr43947862ioe.77.1432752015668; Wed, 27 May 2015 11:40:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.79.73.1 with HTTP; Wed, 27 May 2015 11:40:15 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 27 May 2015 13:40:15 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: release plans? From: Nathan Lynch To: users@conserver.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Pobox-Relay-ID: D1381EE8-049F-11E5-B1F7-C0279F42C9D4-04752483!pb-smtp1.pobox.com X-Spam-Score: -1.49 () BAYES_00,T_DKIM_INVALID X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.72 on 198.151.248.21 X-BeenThere: users@conserver.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Conserver Users List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 May 2015 18:40:23 -0000 Hi, I am new to conserver, but I got it working for my use case without too much fuss. I think it is very nice! However, as soon as I tried to use the tasks functionality, I encountered the issue which this patch fixes: https://www.conserver.com/pipermail/users/2014-September/msg00003.html I have verified that this fixes the issue for me, and I have opened a bug with my distribution (Fedora) to have the fix included in their conserver package: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1225592 Are there plans to make a maintenance/stable release with this fix included? From bryan@conserver.com Wed May 27 21:43:34 2015 Received: from [172.26.21.41] ([66.170.122.254]) (authenticated bits=0) by underdog.stansell.org (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id t4RLhYKd021490 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Wed, 27 May 2015 21:43:34 GMT Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2098\)) Subject: Re: release plans? From: Bryan Stansell In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 27 May 2015 14:43:33 -0700 Message-Id: <0D8B4E23-664E-4AB3-8884-35DCB0F5C0AC@conserver.com> References: To: users@conserver.com X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2098) X-Spam-Score: -0.272 () BAYES_00,RDNS_NONE X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.72 on 198.151.248.21 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by underdog.stansell.org id t4RLhYKd021490 X-BeenThere: users@conserver.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Conserver Users List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 May 2015 21:43:34 -0000 > Are there plans to make a maintenance/stable release with this fix included? There were plans, but then I spaced out and haven’t just gone through the appropriate motions. Thanks for mentioning it, though. I’ll work on getting this and anything else that got queued up out soon - by the end of the week at the latest. It’s been ignored way too long. Bryan From hunkeelin@hotmail.com Thu May 28 01:45:16 2015 Received: from BAY004-OMC4S26.hotmail.com (bay004-omc4s26.hotmail.com [65.54.190.231]) by underdog.stansell.org (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id t4S1jEHP007298 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA256 bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Thu, 28 May 2015 01:45:16 GMT Received: from BAY179-W37 ([65.54.190.199]) by BAY004-OMC4S26.hotmail.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(7.5.7601.22751); Wed, 27 May 2015 18:45:14 -0700 X-TMN: [HTo2wOycWvaaxJgGz6vYnlvZgnTiDstj] X-Originating-Email: [hunkeelin@hotmail.com] Message-ID: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_9e9a5f80-043b-49e2-a29f-2a007c84c464_" From: Keith Lin To: "users@conserver.com" Subject: RE: Welcome to the "users" mailing list Date: Wed, 27 May 2015 18:45:14 -0700 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 May 2015 01:45:14.0718 (UTC) FILETIME=[F1503FE0:01D098E7] X-Spam-Score: -1.508 () BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.72 on 198.151.248.21 X-BeenThere: users@conserver.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Conserver Users List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 May 2015 01:45:16 -0000 --_9e9a5f80-043b-49e2-a29f-2a007c84c464_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable My problem is like #9 in the faq.http://www.conserver.com/FAQ I tried everything=2C the log is not giving me any hint. I just get=0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= [xxx.yyy] console initializing=0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= ERROR: [xxx.yyy] connect(5): Connection refused: forcing down The list in /var/console is not growing either.=20 Compare to my other machine where conserver is working=2C the only differen= ce is I see more instance is running in the not working machine. When I do = "ps auxwww | grep conserver" I get root 22095 0.0 0.3 26304 5280 ?? Is 6:28PM 0:00.01 /usr/local/s= bin/conserver -droot 22096 0.0 0.3 26304 5280 ?? S 6:28PM 0:00= .02 /usr/local/sbin/conserver -droot 22229 0.0 0.3 26304 5280 ?? S = 6:29PM 0:00.01 /usr/local/sbin/conserver -d=0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= root 23506 0.0 0.1 9092 1432 0 S+ 6:40PM 0:00.00 grep conserv= er I get three instance=2C for other working machines i only get two=20 root 17733 0.0 0.1 26304 4316 ?? Is 6:37PM 0:00.00 /usr/local/s= bin/conserver -droot 17734 0.0 0.1 26304 4316 ?? S 6:37PM 0:00= .22 /usr/local/sbin/conserver -d=0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= root 17616 0.0 0.0 5804 884 1 S+ 6:36PM 0:00.04 tail -F /var/= log/conserver if you have any idea or other troubleshooting technique that I missed pleas= e tell me ThanksKeith = --_9e9a5f80-043b-49e2-a29f-2a007c84c464_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
My problem is like #9 in th= e faq.http://www.conserver.com/FAQ

I tried everything=2C the log is not giving me any hint. I just get
=
=0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A=

[xxx.yyy] console initializing

=0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A=

ERROR: [xxx.yyy] connect(5): Connection refused: forcing do= wn


The list in /var/console is n= ot growing either. =3B


Compa= re to my other machine where conserver is working=2C the only difference is= I see more instance is running in the not working machine. =3B

When I do "ps auxwww | grep conserver" I get


root  =3B 22095 =3B 0.0 =3B 0.3 26304&= nbsp=3B 5280 =3B ?? =3B Is =3B  =3B 6:28PM  =3B 0:00.01= /usr/local/sbin/conserver -d

root  =3B 22096 = =3B 0.0 =3B 0.3 26304 =3B 5280 =3B ?? =3B S  =3B  = =3B 6:28PM  =3B 0:00.02 /usr/local/sbin/conserver -d

root  =3B 22229 =3B 0.0 =3B 0.3 26304 =3B 5280 =3B ??&= nbsp=3B S  =3B  =3B 6:29PM  =3B 0:00.01 /usr/local/sbin/conserv= er -d

=0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A=

root  =3B 23506 =3B 0.0 =3B 0.1 =3B 909= 2 =3B 1432  =3B 0 =3B S+ =3B  =3B 6:40PM  =3B 0:00.= 00 grep conserver


I get three in= stance=2C for other working machines i only get two =3B


root  =3B 17733 =3B 0.0 =3B 0.1 263= 04 =3B 4316 =3B ?? =3B Is =3B  =3B 6:37PM  =3B 0:00= .00 /usr/local/sbin/conserver -d

root  =3B 17734&nbs= p=3B 0.0 =3B 0.1 26304 =3B 4316 =3B ?? =3B S  =3B  = =3B 6:37PM  =3B 0:00.22 /usr/local/sbin/conserver -d

=0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A= =0A=

root  =3B17616 =3B 0.0 =3B 0.0 =3B 5804=  =3B 884  =3B 1 =3B S+ =3B  =3B 6:36PM  =3B 0:00.0= 4 tail -F /var/log/conserver


if = you have any idea or other troubleshooting technique that I missed please t= ell me


Thanks

Keith

= --_9e9a5f80-043b-49e2-a29f-2a007c84c464_-- From ntl@pobox.com Fri May 29 03:43:51 2015 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (pb-smtp1.int.icgroup.com [208.72.237.35]) by underdog.stansell.org (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id t4T3hmq4021135; Fri, 29 May 2015 03:43:50 GMT Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2EC656AC5; Thu, 28 May 2015 23:43:46 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=mime-version :in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=sasl; bh=cLCMFzmZA1We IDz09LMYLXDWfJk=; b=X9Us7uDVIv8mPuFQ8FzS2pgRpbt1qPfdepEqm2ZxElUL qGcmUR+7a1jZh2APZOYWl1l1XU+7p3xSfiNfAS7CwWbdjL2LPH7ztaHG2toO0uUc 1DVzEXxUEldhZUwSCM6Eq9Ijk48P++rvwSR6STTt1MUzP9wi+CqTYHD4ht6E8E0= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=mime-version :in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=sasl; b=CStxmp t7IPKUR9ASxMKWk8jIolIbKwRS248oeL+KfOUir7mBdcAN93EaGKkE7Ts4DZ2ELc C+37nLfShv0AcwNubXZNbjXR0Q0EsXgnAEaVZTfWxeZPE9wTu/GyTI8+xvx5sePS eKHEOw10EenRXl+FEHH2LAjpet6nrKf9F6ETA= Received: from pb-smtp1.int.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BF0B56AC4; Thu, 28 May 2015 23:43:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail-ie0-f176.google.com (unknown [209.85.223.176]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4D1A256AC3; Thu, 28 May 2015 23:43:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: by iebgx4 with SMTP id gx4so53604067ieb.0; Thu, 28 May 2015 20:43:45 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.43.141.196 with SMTP id jf4mr12812838icc.80.1432871025936; Thu, 28 May 2015 20:43:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.79.73.1 with HTTP; Thu, 28 May 2015 20:43:45 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <0D8B4E23-664E-4AB3-8884-35DCB0F5C0AC@conserver.com> References: <0D8B4E23-664E-4AB3-8884-35DCB0F5C0AC@conserver.com> Date: Thu, 28 May 2015 22:43:45 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: release plans? From: Nathan Lynch To: Bryan Stansell Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Pobox-Relay-ID: E8D64BCC-05B4-11E5-81A6-C0279F42C9D4-04752483!pb-smtp1.pobox.com X-Spam-Score: -1.49 () BAYES_00,T_DKIM_INVALID X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.72 on 198.151.248.21 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by underdog.stansell.org id t4T3hmq4021135 Cc: users@conserver.com X-BeenThere: users@conserver.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Conserver Users List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 May 2015 03:43:51 -0000 On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 4:43 PM, Bryan Stansell wrote: > >> Are there plans to make a maintenance/stable release with this fix included? > > There were plans, but then I spaced out and haven’t just gone through the appropriate motions. Thanks for mentioning it, though. > > I’ll work on getting this and anything else that got queued up out soon - by the end of the week at the latest. It’s been ignored way too long. Great, thanks! From asavkov@redhat.com Fri May 29 07:26:04 2015 Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) by underdog.stansell.org (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id t4T7Q2Aj011733 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 29 May 2015 07:26:04 GMT Received: from int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.27]) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E7730C9B34; Fri, 29 May 2015 07:25:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from littlebeast.usersys.redhat.com (dhcp-1-118.brq.redhat.com [10.34.1.118]) by int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t4T7PtcM022974; Fri, 29 May 2015 03:25:56 -0400 Received: by littlebeast.usersys.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 23532) id A37E7101460; Fri, 29 May 2015 09:25:54 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 29 May 2015 09:25:54 +0200 From: Artem Savkov To: Bryan Stansell Subject: Re: release plans? Message-ID: <20150529072554.GA8215@littlebeast.usersys.redhat.com> References: <0D8B4E23-664E-4AB3-8884-35DCB0F5C0AC@conserver.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <0D8B4E23-664E-4AB3-8884-35DCB0F5C0AC@conserver.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23.1-rc1 (2014-03-12) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.72 on 198.151.248.21 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.68 on 10.5.11.27 X-Spam-Score: -1.51 () BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Cc: users@conserver.com X-BeenThere: users@conserver.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Conserver Users List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 May 2015 07:26:04 -0000 Hello Bryan, On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 02:43:33PM -0700, Bryan Stansell wrote: > > Are there plans to make a maintenance/stable release with this fix included? > There were plans, but then I spaced out and haven’t just gone through the appropriate motions. Thanks for mentioning it, though. > I’ll work on getting this and anything else that got queued up out soon - by the end of the week at the latest. It’s been ignored way too long. Are there plans to include the breaksequence patch ([1])? I also have another one that adds CONSERVER_USERNAME and CONSERVER_PEERNAME variables to task's environment. It's a simple patch, but I don't think it went through proper testing just yet. Would that be something that can be merged as well? 1. https://www.conserver.com/pipermail/users/2015-March/msg00000.html -- Regards, Artem From bryan@conserver.com Fri May 29 14:58:06 2015 Received: from [10.46.224.152] (mobile-166-177-250-212.mycingular.net [166.177.250.212] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by underdog.stansell.org (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id t4TEw4sF024715 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Fri, 29 May 2015 14:58:06 GMT From: Bryan Stansell Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Subject: Re: release plans? Message-Id: <4707EF0A-4E39-47F3-A9F8-C7F769364EC2@conserver.com> Date: Fri, 29 May 2015 07:58:03 -0700 References: <0D8B4E23-664E-4AB3-8884-35DCB0F5C0AC@conserver.com> <20150529072554.GA8215@littlebeast.usersys.redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20150529072554.GA8215@littlebeast.usersys.redhat.com> To: "users@conserver.com" X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (12F70) X-Spam-Score: -0.272 () BAYES_00,RDNS_NONE X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.72 on 198.151.248.21 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by underdog.stansell.org id t4TEw4sF024715 X-BeenThere: users@conserver.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Conserver Users List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 May 2015 14:58:06 -0000 Yep, going through all the reports/patches/posts since the last release is part of the plan. The break list patch will be included. If you have the username/peername "stable", send it along, otherwise we can try and work it in when you're comfortable with it. Is the peername the result of getpeername(), or more a remote username like from SO_PEERCRED? I just ask because the latter is less portable. Thanks. Bryan > On May 29, 2015, at 12:25 AM, Artem Savkov wrote: > > Are there plans to include the breaksequence patch ([1])? > I also have another one that adds CONSERVER_USERNAME and > CONSERVER_PEERNAME variables to task's environment. It's a simple patch, > but I don't think it went through proper testing just yet. > Would that be something that can be merged as well? > > 1. https://www.conserver.com/pipermail/users/2015-March/msg00000.html > > -- > Regards, > Artem >