The PR [1] with the fix did not get merged until today and a test run with
that code in place seems to successfully delete [2] the spun up VM.
[1] https://github.com/Katello/forklift/pull/274
[2] http://ci.theforeman.org/job/systest_katello/1953/consoleFull
On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 3:26 AM, Domin
On 12/08/16 12:48, Eric D Helms wrote:
> Looks like named provisioners were added in 1.7 which makes me surprised
> they spin up. We'll have to add a version check or consider upgrading
> vagrant.
This doesn't seem to be fixed, I logged in today to find another load of
VMs running. Can you please
Looks like named provisioners were added in 1.7 which makes me surprised
they spin up. We'll have to add a version check or consider upgrading
vagrant.
On Aug 12, 2016 7:30 AM, "Dominic Cleal" wrote:
> On 12/08/16 12:29, Eric D Helms wrote:
> > What version of vagrant is running on the slaves cu
On 12/08/16 12:29, Eric D Helms wrote:
> What version of vagrant is running on the slaves currently?
Vagrant 1.4.2 with vagrant-rackspace 0.1.6
(https://github.com/theforeman/foreman-infra/blob/da45a3fd9652f387dc6a110afbf5f35f07e2d126/puppet/modules/slave/manifests/vagrant.pp).
--
Dominic Cleal
What version of vagrant is running on the slaves currently?
On Aug 12, 2016 3:26 AM, "Dominic Cleal" wrote:
> Could somebody look at the systest_katello job on Jenkins please? It
> doesn't appear to be destroying VMs once the job completes.
>
> The job script has a trap set up to call vagrant de
Could somebody look at the systest_katello job on Jenkins please? It
doesn't appear to be destroying VMs once the job completes.
The job script has a trap set up to call vagrant destroy, but this
appears to error:
+ exit 0
+ vagrant destroy
There are errors in the configuration of this machine. P
