Jump to content

Squid

Community Developer
  • Posts

    28,704
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    314

Posts posted by Squid

  1. 49 minutes ago, Alintya said:

    This plugins behavior should be the default imo

    Otherwise, non required paths are pointless (and i personally like them as I don't need to lookup the path again if i decide to use it in the future, not to mention the potentially missing comment/instruction)

    All future releases of the OS have the same code patch included

  2. No.  ANY path that would look akin to this

    image.png

     

    It's empty.  Seems like a lot of users have left paths (which were unused by them) blank instead of hitting "Remove"

     

    <6.12.8 docker itself ignored it.  6.12.8+ Docker returns an error (IMO rightfully so).

     

    Trouble is that if you've done that without this patch on 6.12.8 when you simply update the container it will return an error,  become an orphan, and require a reinstall from Apps, Previous Apps and you to find the empty path and remove it.  I figured the patch would save everyone a ton of hair by ignoring empty paths when the docker run command gets created.

     

    As said, it's not a bug in the OS.  I'm just making things work the way they used to for this one thing.  I figured that if one of the LT devs winds up asking me WTF happened here (and some users before the patch), it would wind up becoming a nightmare and a one line change solves it.

    • Like 1
  3. 11 minutes ago, aim60 said:

    In fact CA itself will no longer support the very stable 6.11.5

    This has nothing to do with anything.  As a matter of point, the installation URL for CA to run on 6.11.x is publicly posted in the CA thread (and is also a recommended post), and all of the downloaded data files remain fully compatible with that version.  No further updates to CA running on 6.11.5 which is pretty much the same as no further updates to 6.11.5 will happen since 6.12.0 was released.

     

    There came a time when a major overhaul of CA dictated the either I spend forever debugging all of the necessary compatibility for an OS version which had already been supplanted.  I chose to drop compatibility going forward, but make damn sure that all 6.11 users weren't out of luck.  Similar thing happened when I've previously dropped compatibility for everything pre 6.1, everything pre 6.5, everything pre 6.9 on various releases of CA.  If I had to maintain compatibility today with 6.0.0 then trust me CA would not be anything like what you're seeing on 6.11.x

     

    I don't drop compatibility for no reason.  It only gets dropped when the gain isn't worth the pain

    • Like 7
    • Thanks 1
    • Upvote 1
  4. 5 minutes ago, Ussama said:

    rosewell hot-swap bays

    Diagnostics would always help.

     

    Rosewill bays while they do work (I have 24 bays total), they can at times be flakely and always require that little extra push after they are locked in place

  5. 1 minute ago, Revan335 said:

    Is this correct?

     

    Depends upon your point of view.

     

    Since 2015, I've never even considered leaving an "empty" path on any docker template and instead of simply deleted the path from the template.

     

    With 6.12.8, docker is now enforcing a specification and returning an error if you left an empty path on a template when installing it or updating it.   Since there is already a number of users with this issue (self-caused), the plugin is changing how the docker run command gets generated to ignore this problem.

     

    There is NO bug with the OS.  There is NO bug with docker.  The plugin lowers support requests in the forum on what the issue is when all of a sudden they update their containers and they disappear.

     

    You don't need the plugin if you have no templates with empty paths and always delete any empty paths on new installations from CA.

     

     

    • Like 2
    • Thanks 4
×
×
  • Create New...