Skip to content

Conversation

@Slair1
Copy link
Contributor

@Slair1 Slair1 commented Mar 1, 2018

PR2094 made the log path a variable. The cloudstack-agent was modified to use the @agentlog@ variable entry, but the pom.xml file was not correct to do the replacement of the @agentlog@.

Line 62 of the pom.xml handles the replacement with the rename in place

Copy link
Member

@rafaelweingartner rafaelweingartner left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for the PR.
I restarted the Travis build to see if the errors were due to code or some other environment problem.

Copy link
Member

@yadvr yadvr left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Exactly like #2429

Copy link
Contributor

@borisstoyanov borisstoyanov left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@borisstoyanov
Copy link
Contributor

@blueorangutan package

@blueorangutan
Copy link

@borisstoyanov a Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. I'll keep you posted as I make progress.

@blueorangutan
Copy link

Packaging result: ✔centos6 ✔centos7 ✖debian. JID-1757

@rafaelweingartner
Copy link
Member

@Slair1 can you take a look into travis failures?

@Slair1
Copy link
Contributor Author

Slair1 commented Mar 13, 2018

Since this is the same as #2429, should we just back-merge that?

@yadvr
Copy link
Member

yadvr commented Mar 15, 2018

Can you check the build failures @Slair1 ? (See travis for details, or confirm you're able to build without failures?).

@blueorangutan package

@blueorangutan
Copy link

@rhtyd a Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. I'll keep you posted as I make progress.

@blueorangutan
Copy link

Packaging result: ✔centos6 ✔centos7 ✖debian. JID-1779

@Slair1
Copy link
Contributor Author

Slair1 commented Mar 20, 2018

Travis errors look unrelated?

@rafaelweingartner
Copy link
Member

Can you rebase? I have fixed a code that was causing travis errors.

@Slair1 Slair1 force-pushed the CLOUDSTACK-10311-CloudStack-Agent-Log-Rotate branch from 48d09e1 to 2d0dea4 Compare March 20, 2018 16:08
@Slair1
Copy link
Contributor Author

Slair1 commented Mar 20, 2018

@rafaelweingartner sure, just did

@Slair1 Slair1 force-pushed the CLOUDSTACK-10311-CloudStack-Agent-Log-Rotate branch from 2d0dea4 to e7a73f0 Compare March 20, 2018 17:52
@Slair1
Copy link
Contributor Author

Slair1 commented Mar 21, 2018

@rafaelweingartner still seeing some unrelated errors in the travis

@rafaelweingartner
Copy link
Member

Hmmm, may I ask you why did you open the PR against 4.9?

@Slair1
Copy link
Contributor Author

Slair1 commented Mar 21, 2018

@rafaelweingartner as said in the other comments, there is already a PR that addresses this issue in future versions. We are running 4.9.3 right now in our environment.

@yadvr
Copy link
Member

yadvr commented Mar 21, 2018

@Slair1 the changes are already in 4.11, master branches. By future version, do you expect the fix to be in a future 4.9.x version (likely 4.9.4.0)?

@rafaelweingartner
Copy link
Member

Sorry for asking again, I forgot.
So, I was checking travis logs. It seems to be a timeout issue when downloading dependencies. Can you increase the travis timeouts and test it again?

@Slair1
Copy link
Contributor Author

Slair1 commented Mar 21, 2018

@rafaelweingartner yep, i was hoping it would be included in 4.9.4.0

@Slair1
Copy link
Contributor Author

Slair1 commented Mar 21, 2018

@rafaelweingartner how do i increase the travis timeouts?

@rafaelweingartner
Copy link
Member

Timeouts can be changed in .travil.yml.
Are we going to have a 4.9.4.0? The version 4.9 is EOL.

@Slair1
Copy link
Contributor Author

Slair1 commented Mar 21, 2018

@rafaelweingartner thanks for info on increasing the travis timeout.

I guess i thought there would be a 4.9.4.0, there have been other PRs merged in 4.9 and the POMs for it have been updated to 4.9.4.0 it looks like at least.

@Slair1
Copy link
Contributor Author

Slair1 commented Mar 21, 2018

@rafaelweingartner sorry for the newbie question, but i updated the .travis.yml file and it now shows up in my commit, is that correct?

@yadvr
Copy link
Member

yadvr commented May 1, 2018

Same as referenced PR in one of the comments, I'll merge this. However, on 4.9 and olders branches we no longer support Travis.

@yadvr yadvr merged commit df2b26e into apache:4.9 May 2, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants