similar to: Backward compatibility issues in 0.24.0

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi all There is some discussion of doing a 0.23.3 release to backport a number of bugs fixes from 0.24.0. What do people think of this idea? Would you prefer a dot upgrade to 0.23.3 or are most planning to upgrade cleanly to 0.24.x? I understand from Luke that 0.24.1 will be released shortly and that 0.23.2 clients should cleanly connect and

Greetings, Shouldn''t puppetd -o --ignoreschedules ... imply that splay* options are ignored :-) If that''s not the intended behavior could we get a --run-now that ignores splay* and schedules? Cheers, Ryan

Hi all, It was brought to my attention that the front page lists 0.23.3 as the stable release, but that no such release exists. I could have sworn I released this a few weeks ago, but now I can find no evidence of that. I''m going to publish it from the latest commit in the 0.23.x branch as soon as possible (probably in about 12 hours), so if anyone wants to get that last-minute

At long last, 0.24.0 has been released. Look for your friendly packagers to package it up in the near future, but in the meantime you can download it: http://reductivelabs.com/downloads/puppet/puppet-0.24.0.tgz I''ll be walking the different release sites (RubyForge et al) and posting it there, too. Look for a related announcement later today on changes in development practices

I see in the changelog that: You now must specify an environment and you are required to specify the valid environments for your site. (#911) Does this mean that the puppetmaster has to be updated before clients work correctly? I ask because I''m testing out a client upgrade to 0.24.0 (server is still 0.23.2) and this is what I''m seeing: [~]% sudo /foo/bin/puppetd

Hi, I was managing a bunch of Centos 4.5 with Puppet until the ruby security patch bit me creating ssl problems. As I''m not able/willing to patch the installed version I tried upgrading to dlutter''s 0.24.0-2.el5 version. Unfortunately this didn''t help much. So I removed the server and client installation completely (making sure to manually remove the config, ssl, ...

xf86-input-libinput 0.24.0 is now available. A couple of new features were added this cycle: * tablets now support a configurable pressure curve * tablets now have a 'area ratio' setting to be able to match the tablet aspect ratio with that of the screen * the mouse wheel's click angle now (correctly) affects how fast the scroll wheel triggers. In particular, if you have a wheel

I''ve now fixed all of the bugs I''m going to fix for 0.24.0/misspiggy. Please test that the current ''master'' branch in git works for you. I''ll probably release tomorrow, or maybe early on Thursday if I don''t hear of any show-stoppers. -- I don''t want any yes-men around me. I want everybody to tell me the truth even if it

Hi, I am having a problem where puppetd won''t start on one of my RHEL 5 machines with the --listen option enabled. 0.23.2 seems to run fine but 0.24.0 dies leaving the pid file still there. I installed puppet using the latest gem from reductive labs. It works fine on what is meant to be an identical system. I tried running strace and it seems to exit after trying to write to a bad

Hi, I''m getting a "Could not retrieve dependency" error and I can''t figure why. Someone got a cluestick for me? I''m using the following simplified configuration to ensure sshd is running and gets reloaded when the config file changes: ---- site.pp ---- import "classes/sshd.pp" node obsd42 { include ssh-server } node debian40 { include

this time when I try to connect the first node: [root@qaagt20 ~]# /etc/init.d/puppet start Starting puppet: /usr/lib/ruby/1.8/net/http.rb:560:in `initialize'': No route to host - connect(2) (Errno::EHOSTUNREACH) from /usr/lib/ruby/1.8/net/http.rb:560:in `open'' from /usr/lib/ruby/1.8/net/http.rb:560:in `connect'' from

Hi all, I''m in the throes of the REST conversion and I''m wondering: How important is it to retain backward compatibility? The language will clearly be consistent between the two, but it looks like it''s going to be a heckuva lot more complicated to keep compatibility for all network services (as in, for each of them, I''ll have to write a shell that

Just started a "pilot" puppet server for real after messing around in VMs for the past week or so... I used the 0.24.0 since it was available, and on the test run, got this: err: Could not prefetch package provider ''yum'': Execution of ''/usr/bin/python /usr/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/puppet/provider/package/yumhelper.py'' returned 512: /usr/bin/python:

This is particularly nasty, since it''s on the puppetmaster itself: [root@puppet tmp]# rpm -q yum puppet puppet-server yum-3.0.5-1.el5.centos.5 puppet-0.24.0-2.el5 puppet-server-0.24.0-2.el5 [root@puppet tmp]# cat /etc/issue CentOS release 5 (Final) Here''s the output of puppetd --debug: notice: Starting catalog run debug: Loaded state in 0.01 seconds debug: Prefetching rpm

Hi, I have a centOS with puppet-server : puppet-server-0.24.0-2.el5 First of I have to say that ever since I installed puppet-server-0.24, I''m unabble to run the puppetmasterd with de flag -d, the programs goes always to daemon mode, with no debug output. Second issue is related with debian clients with puppet-0.20.1-1, that when I have a service subscribed to a file returns always the

Hello Syslinux Team, Syslinux 5.xx / 6.xx are currently showing some backward compatibility issues. Between the ML and the IRC, there have been some comments / reports regarding memtest, older kernels, plop boot manager, ifplop.c32, hdt.c32... In some cases, the problems were seen when booting with some specific variant of Syslinux 5.xx / 6.xx (say, ISOLINUX only, or PXELINUX only); or with

Hi All, I'm working with llvm experimenting the rich frame work and learning the compiler behaviour. can any one help me a way to back port the solution files to VisualStudio 6.0 project files. It would help me a lot if some one can suggest some thing so that I can work on the current code. Thanks in Advance, -Vikas. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was

Hello, Vikas > can any one help me a way to back port the solution files to > VisualStudio 6.0 project files. Unfortunately, this is pretty useless: VC6 C++ is deeply broken in order to compile LLVM. -- With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov. Faculty of Mathematics & Mechanics, Saint Petersburg State University.

Hi Justin, There are some backward incompatible features of PTX; for example, special registers are redefined as v4i32 (they were v4i16) in PTX 2.0. And CUDA 4.0 was rolled out last week. I heard that some instructions are deprecated. I am not sure how stable (or unstable) PTX specification is. Do you have a rough assessment of its stability? If PTX specification is still fast evolving, I would

Hi Guus, I know this comes up from time to time. So it is time to update our expectations. Is there a roadmap for a 1.1 backward compatibility already? -rsd -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://www.tinc-vpn.org/pipermail/tinc/attachments/20141228/fcb2b44a/attachment.html>