http_proxy and no_proxy not filtered from config

Bug #1724338 reported by John A Meinel on 2017-10-17
6
This bug affects 1 person
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
juju
High
John A Meinel
2.2
High
John A Meinel
2.3
High
John A Meinel

Bug Description

A *very* common mistake that people do when trying to interact with juju and proxies it something like:

juju bootstrap --model-default http_proxy=XXX --model-default no_proxy=YYY

however, the actual values you have to set are:
juju bootstrap --model-default http-proxy="$http_proxy" --model-default no-proxy="$no_proxy"

We should look for "http_proxy" and either provide a warning that "you really should use http-proxy" or just accept the value instead.

John A Meinel (jameinel) wrote :

It turns out that all providers have to directly validate "unknown" fields. Most do it naturally because that is where provider-specific configuration lives.

However, LXD didn't have any provider-specific configuration, so was missing the check.

I also updated our validation to do a simple spellcheck for getting "_" mixed up with "-".

Changed in juju:
assignee: nobody → John A Meinel (jameinel)
milestone: none → 2.3-beta2
John A Meinel (jameinel) wrote :
Changed in juju:
status: Triaged → In Progress
Changed in juju:
status: In Progress → Fix Committed
status: Fix Committed → In Progress
Changed in juju:
milestone: 2.3-beta2 → none
Anastasia (anastasia-macmood) wrote :

Since the PR in comment # 2 has been merged into 2.2 and 2.2 has since been merged into 2.3 and develop (heading into 2.4), I am marking this report as Fix Released.

Changed in juju:
milestone: none → 2.4-beta1
status: In Progress → Fix Committed
Changed in juju:
status: Fix Committed → Fix Released
To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  Edit
Everyone can see this information.

Other bug subscribers