Juju rejects lxd 2.1

[Aaron Bentley]

Juju errors with: invalid config: lxd version 2.1, juju needs at least 2.0.0

As seen here:
http://reports.vapour.ws/releases/issue/57b5c506749a567eabd11a4a

Full log not given here because it contains certs. See above link for full logs.

[SRU Information]

[Impact]
The current juju packages don't allow for a newer lxd version than 2.0.0. This has been corrected instead to check the LXD API version.

[Verification]
Install the archive version of LXD, and ensure it is LXD 2.1 or greater. You should be able to bootstrap with the local provider.

juju bootstrap lxd lxd

[Regression Potential]
As the local provider doesn't work now with LXD, there is no potential for further regressions on local provider specifically. However, there is inherent risk in the update itself that it fails to address the issue.

[Richard Harding (rharding)]

To be clear LXD 2.1 is new in yakkety today.

[Stéphane Graber (stgraber)]

Looks like the issue is that Juju is parsing the LXD version and failing at that :)

Rather than attempting to parse the server version string, Juju should be changed to look for the api_version and api_status instead. api_version should be "1.0" and api_status should be "stable".

Those two combined guarantees that LXD supports the full 1.0 API as was included in the 2.0.0 release. Additions to the API are done in a backward compatible way and are always matched with a new string being added to api_extensions, should Juju ever want to check and use those extra features.

[Aaron Bentley (abentley)]

@rharding: Juju's complaint is that 2.1 is not "at least" 2.0.0. It doesn't look like intended behaviour. If in fact, Juju doesn't want 2.1.x, it should say something like "juju needs lxd 2.0, no more or less".

[Dimiter Naydenov (dimitern)]

Fix proposed: https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/6054

[Martin Pitt (pitti)]

The fix may have landed upstream two weeks ago, but xenial's and yakkety's packages are still affected. I. e. yakkety's juju is completely broken, and xenial's is broken if you use the lxd backport. Can you please land this fix soon?

[Martin Pitt (pitti)]

I tried to install juju from https://launchpad.net/~juju/+archive/ubuntu/daily, but this is severely out of date (July 26) -- known?

[Nicholas Skaggs (nskaggs)]

Martin, the edge channel in the snap store has replaced the daily ppa. This ppa is where we release betas:

https://launchpad.net/~juju/+archive/ubuntu/devel

Now as to landing this fix, we've pushed packages to proposed as you've seen, but encountered various failures with beta16 and now beta17. The blocker for beta17 landing is yet another iteration on juju failing to build on 32-bit arches. We don't support them and don't build them. IMHO, they never should have been built and uploaded to the archive. We worked around the issue for beta16, but can no longer do so for beta17.

As it stands we must resolve bug 1614969. In short, we want to remove all 32-bit builds of the juju package from the archives. They are unsupported and prevent us from landing updates as desired.

[Launchpad Janitor (janitor)]

This bug was fixed in the package juju-core - 2.0~rc3-0ubuntu4.16.10.1

---------------
juju-core (2.0~rc3-0ubuntu4.16.10.1) yakkety-proposed; urgency=medium

  * Also pass no_proxy to bootstrap

 -- Nicholas Skaggs <email address hidden> Tue, 11 Oct 2016 11:10:06 -0400

[Brian Murray (brian-murray)]

Hello Aaron, or anyone else affected,

Accepted juju-core into xenial-proposed. The package will build now and be available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/juju-core/2.0.0-0ubuntu0.16.04.1 in a few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.

Please help us by testing this new package. See https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation how to enable and use -proposed. Your feedback will aid us getting this update out to other Ubuntu users.

If this package fixes the bug for you, please add a comment to this bug, mentioning the version of the package you tested, and change the tag from verification-needed to verification-done. If it does not fix the bug for you, please add a comment stating that, and change the tag to verification-failed. In either case, details of your testing will help us make a better decision.

Further information regarding the verification process can be found at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/PerformingSRUVerification . Thank you in advance!

[Nicholas Skaggs (nskaggs)]

I am now able to bootstrap using LXD 2.0.5.

juju bootstrap lxd lxd
Creating Juju controller "lxd" on lxd/localhost
Looking for packaged Juju agent version 2.0.0 for amd64
To configure your system to better support LXD containers, please see: https://github.com/lxc/lxd/blob/master/doc/production-setup.md
Launching controller instance(s) on lxd/localhost...
 - juju-25d61c-0 (arch=amd64)

....

[Launchpad Janitor (janitor)]

This bug was fixed in the package juju-core - 2.0.0-0ubuntu0.16.04.2

---------------
juju-core (2.0.0-0ubuntu0.16.04.2) xenial; urgency=medium

  * DPKG_MAINTSCRIPT_ARCH doesn't work in .config, use dpkg check (LP: #1614969)

 -- Nicholas Skaggs <email address hidden> Mon, 31 Oct 2016 15:55:49 -0400