Yea, I saw the latest package got named twice as it were. I'll have a
look. It doesn't hurt anything, but the package should be
2.0-beta7~20160512~3966+0bd48e6f~16.04
On 05/12/2016 05:15 PM, Adam Stokes wrote:
Nice but this version is a bit crazy:
2.0-beta7~20160512~3966~0bd48e6f-20160512
.@canonical.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Nice but this version is a bit crazy:
>>
>> 2.0-beta7~20160512~3966~0bd48e6f-20160512+3966+0bd48e6f~16.04
>>
>> Maybe just drop -20160512+3966+0bd48e6f as it seems to be repetative
>>
>> On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 4:39 PM,
Enablement
juju experimental packages
juju-golang
juju packages
juju proposed packages
juju stable packages
Juju Staging
On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 5:15 PM, Adam Stokes <adam.sto...@canonical.com>
wrote:
> Nice but this version is a bit crazy:
>
> 2.0-beta7~20160512~3966~0bd48e6f-2016051
Nice but this version is a bit crazy:
2.0-beta7~20160512~3966~0bd48e6f-20160512+3966+0bd48e6f~16.04
Maybe just drop -20160512+3966+0bd48e6f as it seems to be repetative
On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 4:39 PM, Ryan Beisner <ryan.beis...@canonical.com>
wrote:
> Absolutely <3 this.
>
&
Absolutely <3 this.
On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 3:36 PM, Nicholas Skaggs <
nicholas.ska...@canonical.com> wrote:
> Whether you want to track Juju development more closely, or simply like
> living on the edge, there is a new ppa available for you. Dubbed the Juju
> Daily ppa[1], it] contains the
Whether you want to track Juju development more closely, or simply like
living on the edge, there is a new ppa available for you. Dubbed the
Juju Daily ppa[1], it] contains the latest blessed builds from CI
testing. Installing this ppa and upgrading regularly allows you to stay
in sync with
I tried the "dpkg-reconfigure lxd" several times and it didn't make any
difference. I discovered that I had an old lxc package that was
installed and upgraded to lxc1. I removed lxc1 and lxc-net and tried
to purge all of their old config files.
I then did the "dpkg-reconfiugre lxd" again and
If you have a container or images, you can't run LXD init, because it would
potentially change the storage backend, etc. If you already had LXD up and
running, what were you looking to do with LXD init ? It is possible that
you could delete all of your instances and images and then run it. Or you
