Hi Thomas Goirand <z...@debian.org> writes:
> On 06/24/2014 05:18 AM, Gaudenz Steinlin wrote: >> Hi >> >> Thomas Goirand <z...@debian.org> writes: >> >>> Hi Gaudenz, >>> >>> Thanks for sending this bug report. >>> >>> Well, I'm surprised to read this, because I packaged websockify 0.6.0 >>> after someone on IRC told me that there was an issue with websockify >>> 0.5, and that novnc needed >= 0.6.0 in order to work properly. >>> >>> I've been told that the issue without 0.6.0 is that you get some old >>> zombie process after each VNC connections. >>> >> >> I did not test novnc, so I can't comment much on this. But from looking >> at the code I would be very surprised if the current code for >> nova-novncproxy in Icehouse would work with websockify 0.6.0. >> >>> I have to admit that I don't really use novnc myself, I am a SPICE user >>> (I think it's far better and performing that VNC). >> >> I did test the spice proxy and the version from Icehouse does not work >> with websockify 0.6.0. Did it work for you? >> >>> >>> I tried to use the patch that you sent as a reference [1]. >>> Unfortunately, it doesn't apply against the current Icehouse release. >>> >>> Solly, you're the author of the patch. Do you think a backport to >>> Icehouse could be made? This would avoid a lot of headakes for me and I >>> would really like avoiding the downgrade of websockify if possible. >> >> While I certainly won't oppose a backport of that patch to Icehouse, I'm >> don't see much of a dilemma in the short term. As the current status in >> Debian unstable with websockify 0.6.0 does not work at all for all proxy >> modes (novnc and spice) downgrading is strictly the better alternative >> even if there are bugs with novnc and websockify 0.5.1. At least it will >> work to some degree again. >> >> Long term I agree that migrating to websockify 0.6.0 is preferable. But >> I doubt we will have a compatible version in Icehouse soon. >> >> Gaudenz > > Well, have a look over there: > https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1048703 > > There's really a problem with websockify < 0.6, so I don't think > downgrading is the solution. I don't really want to leave a package that > produces zombie processes when we use it. > > This patch for Nova applies nearly cleanly (with a single 2 lines > offset) on the current Icehouse branch: > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/94778/ I just had a short look at the patch and spotted a typo "Hanler" instead of Handler in the code. I currently don't have time to further test it. Maybe on Thursday. > > The patch which you referred to earlier, (ie: > https://review.openstack.org/91663), while merged in master, also brings > some re-factorization, so it might be less appropriate for us than just > #94778. Do you think you can try to find the time and see if #94778 > fixes the issue (I'm busy with other stuff right now, and I'm not sure I > can test right away now...)? Maybe carying this one patch as Debian > specific patch would be enough. If you want to carry a Debian specific patch, then I would rather take the patches to websockify reference in https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1048703. Like this you can do the minimal changes actaully required to fix the problem. There are two patches in there and I don't know if both are required. The first one looks like done in a haste and is very unclean (lot's of unneccessary whitespace changes). But both were apparently merged into websockify. Gaudenz -- Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better. ~ Samuel Beckett ~ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org