Validation of configuration settings #649
Labels
No Label
0.2.0
0.3.0
0.4.0
0.5.0
0.5.1
0.6.0
0.6.1
0.7.0
0.8.0
0.9.0
1.0.0
1.1.0
1.10.0
1.10.1
1.10.2
1.10a2
1.11.0
1.12.0
1.12.1
1.13.0
1.14.0
1.15.0
1.15.1
1.2.0
1.3.0
1.4.1
1.5.0
1.6.0
1.6.1
1.7.0
1.7.1
1.7β
1.8.0
1.8.1
1.8.2
1.8.3
1.8β
1.9.0
1.9.0-s3branch
1.9.0a1
1.9.0a2
1.9.0b1
1.9.1
1.9.2
1.9.2a1
LeastAuthority.com automation
blocker
cannot reproduce
cloud-branch
code
code-dirnodes
code-encoding
code-frontend
code-frontend-cli
code-frontend-ftp-sftp
code-frontend-magic-folder
code-frontend-web
code-mutable
code-network
code-nodeadmin
code-peerselection
code-storage
contrib
critical
defect
dev-infrastructure
documentation
duplicate
enhancement
fixed
invalid
major
minor
n/a
normal
operational
packaging
somebody else's problem
supercritical
task
trivial
unknown
was already fixed
website
wontfix
worksforme
No Milestone
No Assignees
3 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Reference: tahoe-lafs/trac-2024-07-25#649
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
No description provided.
Delete Branch "%!s(<nil>)"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
Configuration settings like tub.location and introducer.furl are not validated by the code.
tub.location is silently ignored if a port spec is missing. The same is true for introducer.furl if there's an error in the FURL ("at" instead of "@", as copied from [//pipermail/tahoe-dev/2009-February/001341.html])
Thanks for the bug report, Nils. See also #371 (corrupted introducer.furl causes subtle startup breakage).
Heh, I just hit this exact same problem. I cut and pasted the introducer furl from the web archive of the mailing list and started tahoe. It said "probably started". But it fails to connect to the introducer. Investigation led me to the
logs/incidents
directory which had an incident report .bz2. Runningflogtool dump
on that bz2 file yielded a log which included:It'd be great if this exception were hit during the
Client
constructor: that would make it a lot easier to report the error duringtahoe start
. I think it may still be necessary to changetahoe start
to remove a fork or two to allow constructor-time exceptions to be reported by the parent process.zooko: what were the next couple frames in that stacktrace?
I mistakenly put the
pb://
URL in quotes in the config file, which resulted in the following exception:The documentation in
docs/configuration.rst
should state thattub.location
MUST include a portnumber,even if
tub.port
already specified one.It would be very good if
tahoe
would check if thetub.location
intahoe.cfg
corresponds to the valuesin existing
private/*.furl
files.As of 1.9.2 it does not, so that the
tub.location
intahoe.cfg
is in factoverridden by existing
private/*.furl
files(why these files have to be in
private/
for storage nodes but not for introducers is another question...)I opened #2139 to be about removing some forks or moving setup work to be before the fork.