From brian.kinney at memeo-inc.com  Thu Jul  9 15:21:14 2015
From: brian.kinney at memeo-inc.com (Brian Kinney)
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2015 14:21:14 -0700
Subject: [Machinery] Machinery
Message-ID: <c02a3d5a7ed0ecb00eb47b2c71d210a7@mail.gmail.com>

One of my classic use cases would be to use as a system comparator.

Which library is lacking/older/newer than another between two examples?

Then, provide options to sync specific RPMs (install/update/downgrade) on
demand from such a list.



Does machinery have the capabilities to do this yet?



-- 

Brian A. Kinney

Director of Technical Operations
Memeo, a Division of UNICOM Global
t: +1.408.355.7243 c: +1.408.442.4150

brian.kinney at memeo-inc.com



This e-mail is private and may be confidential and is for the intended
recipient only. If misdirected, please notify us by telephone and confirm
that it has been deleted from your system and any copies destroyed. If you
are not the intended recipient you are strictly prohibited from using,
printing, copying, distributing or disseminating this e-mail or any
information contained in it.  We use reasonable measures to virus scan all
E-mails leaving UNICOM Global but no warranty is given that this E-mail and
any attachments are virus free. You should ensure you have adequate
measures in place for your own virus checking.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.suse.com/pipermail/machinery/attachments/20150709/d47663a1/attachment.htm>

From matwey.kornilov at gmail.com  Sat Jul 18 11:50:44 2015
From: matwey.kornilov at gmail.com (Matwey V. Kornilov)
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 2015 20:50:44 +0300
Subject: [Machinery] SUSE Studio integration
Message-ID: <CAJs94EaYG4jgcn9LHxAgPvezaRdnWeMpwMBA0N1HAOi5UZkw4A@mail.gmail.com>

Hello,

Is it possible to export machinery profile to SUSE Studio? Is this
feature planned?

-- 
With best regards,
Matwey V. Kornilov
http://blog.matwey.name
xmpp://0x2207 at jabber.ru

From cschum at suse.de  Sat Jul 18 15:35:43 2015
From: cschum at suse.de (Cornelius Schumacher)
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 2015 23:35:43 +0200
Subject: [Machinery] SUSE Studio integration
In-Reply-To: <CAJs94EaYG4jgcn9LHxAgPvezaRdnWeMpwMBA0N1HAOi5UZkw4A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJs94EaYG4jgcn9LHxAgPvezaRdnWeMpwMBA0N1HAOi5UZkw4A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1456656.a2DM0jxQ5M@tegetthoff>

On Saturday 18 July 2015 20:50:44 Matwey V. Kornilov wrote:
> 
> Is it possible to export machinery profile to SUSE Studio? Is this
> feature planned?

You can go via a Kiwi or Autoyast profile and import that. Use

    machinery export-kiwi --kiwi-dir <somedir> <yourdescription>

to create a Kiwi profile in the directory <somedir> and then use the "import" 
type, when creating a new appliance in Studio to upload the Kiwi profile 
there.

This is what is possible today. A more direct import would be possible to 
implement, and we actually have talked about it at some time. What would be 
your use case for this feature?

-- 
Cornelius Schumacher <cschum at suse.de>

From matwey.kornilov at gmail.com  Sun Jul 19 11:11:31 2015
From: matwey.kornilov at gmail.com (Matwey V. Kornilov)
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2015 20:11:31 +0300
Subject: [Machinery] SUSE Studio integration
In-Reply-To: <1456656.a2DM0jxQ5M@tegetthoff>
References: <CAJs94EaYG4jgcn9LHxAgPvezaRdnWeMpwMBA0N1HAOi5UZkw4A@mail.gmail.com>
	<1456656.a2DM0jxQ5M@tegetthoff>
Message-ID: <moglo4$5s2$1@ger.gmane.org>

19.07.2015 00:35, Cornelius Schumacher ?????:
> On Saturday 18 July 2015 20:50:44 Matwey V. Kornilov wrote:
>>
>> Is it possible to export machinery profile to SUSE Studio? Is this
>> feature planned?
>
> You can go via a Kiwi or Autoyast profile and import that. Use
>
>      machinery export-kiwi --kiwi-dir <somedir> <yourdescription>
>
> to create a Kiwi profile in the directory <somedir> and then use the "import"
> type, when creating a new appliance in Studio to upload the Kiwi profile
> there.

Many thanks, this is what I missed. I thought only kiwi export was possible.

>
> This is what is possible today. A more direct import would be possible to
> implement, and we actually have talked about it at some time. What would be
> your use case for this feature?
>

Would be great If it were possible to do directly through machinery 
command using studio API. And much more, would be great If machinery 
could detect appliance ID of the current system.

The use case is simple - to sync changes back to the studio appliance. 
Sometimes when I deploy an appliance from the studio, the appliance is 
not good enough configured and I have to tune it manually. Now I have to 
do this twice, because need to introduce same changes into the appliance.

The other possible use case could be to migrate 'typical' installation 
directly into the studio appliance.


From cschum at suse.de  Mon Jul 20 06:22:18 2015
From: cschum at suse.de (Cornelius Schumacher)
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2015 14:22:18 +0200
Subject: [Machinery] SUSE Studio integration
In-Reply-To: <moglo4$5s2$1@ger.gmane.org>
References: <CAJs94EaYG4jgcn9LHxAgPvezaRdnWeMpwMBA0N1HAOi5UZkw4A@mail.gmail.com>
	<1456656.a2DM0jxQ5M@tegetthoff> <moglo4$5s2$1@ger.gmane.org>
Message-ID: <1462289.UZcpyT1OUm@endurance>

On Sunday 19 July 2015 20:11:31 Matwey V. Kornilov wrote:
> 
> Would be great If it were possible to do directly through machinery
> command using studio API. And much more, would be great If machinery
> could detect appliance ID of the current system.
> 
> The use case is simple - to sync changes back to the studio appliance.
> Sometimes when I deploy an appliance from the studio, the appliance is
> not good enough configured and I have to tune it manually. Now I have to
> do this twice, because need to introduce same changes into the appliance.

This is a very good point. It would provide similar functionality on a real 
system as you have in Studio's testdrive, where you can merge back modified 
files into the appliance definition.

-- 
Cornelius Schumacher <cschum at suse.de>

From fteodori at suse.com  Tue Jul 21 05:22:40 2015
From: fteodori at suse.com (Federica Teodori)
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2015 13:22:40 +0200
Subject: [Machinery] Machinery 1.11.1 is out!
Message-ID: <55AE2B80.2000006@suse.com>

Dearest Machineriest,

Time for a summer release! If the heat is taking its toll just run to
your favourite (air-conditioned) server room or basement and refresh
your eyes with the new output of "machinery compare".

The team went trough yet another round of usability tests and made
several mockups to finally come up with a more intuitive way for
machinery to represents compared data.
Now to spot any difference between your systems should be a piece of cake.

Also the HTML view got some specific improvements:

machinery show  --html $your_system_description

Once your files are extracted, the file name will be replaced by a link
in your HTML view, allowing you to either display or download the file
of choice.

For those with experimental features enabled [*], we also have another
goodie:

machinery compare --html $description1 $description2

In the unmanaged files section you can now see a "Diff files" option.
Click on it to see a diff of what has changed in your files between the
system descriptions you're comparing.


Complete changelog follows:

## Version 1.11.1 - Tue Jul 21 09:44:16 CEST 2015

* Fix unmanaged-files diff in HTML view (gh#SUSE/machinery#1143)

## Version 1.11.0 - Mon Jul 20 13:51:09 CEST 2015

* Fix comparison output for scopes that were excluded
(gh#SUSE/machinery#1029)
* Fix connection errors caused by reading from stdin
(gh#SUSE/machinery#1050)
* Differences between unmanaged files can be viewed in the HTML comparison

## Version 1.10.0 - Thu Jul 09 16:26:35 CEST 2015

* Data which hasn't changed is not shown in the comparison HTML view by
default
* Improve display of package differences in compare command
* Add `man` command to show the Machinery man page
* Content of extracted files can be displayed in HTML view
--

We hope you?ll enjoy this release, and please do get in touch with us if
you have any feedback or questions.

Sincerely,
Your Machinery team

[*]To enable the experimental features just run
"machinery config experimental-features=true"

From matwey.kornilov at gmail.com  Thu Jul 23 03:22:49 2015
From: matwey.kornilov at gmail.com (Matwey V. Kornilov)
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 12:22:49 +0300
Subject: [Machinery] Inspecting remote system: machinery user
Message-ID: <moqcba$6q6$1@ger.gmane.org>

Hello,

https://github.com/SUSE/machinery/blob/master/man/machinery-inspect.1.md 
says that:

"When inspecting as non-root the user has to have the following command 
whitelist given in the sudoers file:

machinery ALL=(ALL) NOPASSWD: 
/usr/bin/find,/usr/bin/cat,/bin/cat,/usr/bin/rsync,/bin/rpm -V 
*,/bin/tar --create *"

It would be also great to specify recommended secure way to create 
machinery user. I've done the following:

machinery:x:492:490::/var/lib/machinery:/bin/bash

but not sure whether it really needs bash as default shell? It would be 
also great to add such a user to SUSE installations by default in future.


From matwey.kornilov at gmail.com  Thu Jul 23 03:32:17 2015
From: matwey.kornilov at gmail.com (Matwey V. Kornilov)
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 12:32:17 +0300
Subject: [Machinery] Inspecting remote system: ssh access
Message-ID: <moqcba$6q6$2@ger.gmane.org>

Hello,

I've found that when I do

machinery inspect --verbose -n name -r machinery ip

machinery creates an ssh session for every singe command. On the remote 
side, I see the following (sorry, long log):

Jul 23 09:15:32 linux sshd[24346]: Accepted publickey for machinery from 
192.168.10.232 port 44327 ssh2: RSA 
ad:f5:1f:20:2e:6a:ec:7c:1d:7a:d8:35:71:86:1b:be [MD5]
Jul 23 09:15:32 linux sshd[24346]: pam_unix(sshd:session): session 
opened for user machinery by (uid=0)
Jul 23 09:15:32 linux systemd: pam_unix(systemd-user:session): session 
opened for user machinery by (uid=0)
Jul 23 09:15:32 linux sudo: machinery : TTY=unknown ; 
PWD=/var/lib/machinery ; USER=root ; ENV=LC_ALL=C ; 
COMMAND=/usr/bin/find 
/lib/modules/3.16.7-21-default/kernel/drivers/net/ethernet/neterion/vxge 
-xdev -maxdepth 1 -maxdepth 6 -printf %y\0%P\0%l\0
Jul 23 09:15:32 linux sudo: pam_unix(sudo:session): session opened for 
user root by (uid=0)
Jul 23 09:15:32 linux sudo: pam_unix(sudo:session): session closed for 
user root
Jul 23 09:15:32 linux sshd[24350]: Received disconnect from 
192.168.10.232: 11: disconnected by user
Jul 23 09:15:32 linux sshd[24346]: pam_unix(sshd:session): session 
closed for user machinery
Jul 23 09:15:32 linux systemd: pam_unix(systemd-user:session): session 
closed for user machinery
Jul 23 09:15:33 linux sshd[24381]: Accepted publickey for machinery from 
192.168.10.232 port 44328 ssh2: RSA 
ad:f5:1f:20:2e:6a:ec:7c:1d:7a:d8:35:71:86:1b:be [MD5]
Jul 23 09:15:33 linux sshd[24381]: pam_unix(sshd:session): session 
opened for user machinery by (uid=0)
Jul 23 09:15:33 linux systemd: pam_unix(systemd-user:session): session 
opened for user machinery by (uid=0)
Jul 23 09:15:33 linux sudo: machinery : TTY=unknown ; 
PWD=/var/lib/machinery ; USER=root ; ENV=LC_ALL=C ; 
COMMAND=/usr/bin/find 
/lib/modules/3.16.7-21-default/kernel/drivers/net/can/usb/peak_usb -xdev 
-maxdepth 1 -maxdepth 6 -printf %y\0%P\0%l\0
Jul 23 09:15:33 linux sudo: pam_unix(sudo:session): session opened for 
user root by (uid=0)
Jul 23 09:15:33 linux sudo: pam_unix(sudo:session): session closed for 
user root
Jul 23 09:15:33 linux sshd[24385]: Received disconnect from 
192.168.10.232: 11: disconnected by user
Jul 23 09:15:33 linux sshd[24381]: pam_unix(sshd:session): session 
closed for user machinery
Jul 23 09:15:33 linux systemd: pam_unix(systemd-user:session): session 
closed for user machinery

So, this kind of activity (opening and closing thousands of ssh 
connections) can be mistaken for ssh brute-force or some other kind of 
malicious network activity. And this is an issue, especially if I 
inspect machine using ssh connection through the public network. At the 
specific moment I would be blocked by my network management team.

I don't see limitations to reuse existing ssh connection, are there any?


From matwey.kornilov at gmail.com  Thu Jul 23 03:39:05 2015
From: matwey.kornilov at gmail.com (Matwey V. Kornilov)
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 12:39:05 +0300
Subject: [Machinery] Inspecting remote system: specify ssh connection options
Message-ID: <moqcnp$6q6$3@ger.gmane.org>


Hello,

Is it possible to specify ssh port when running `machinery inspect'? I 
mean, my ssh port is moved to 2022 on the remote machine, how should I 
specify -p option for machinery? Unfortunately, I have not found how to 
do this in the docs.


From tgoettlicher at suse.de  Thu Jul 23 03:55:32 2015
From: tgoettlicher at suse.de (Thomas Goettlicher)
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 11:55:32 +0200
Subject: [Machinery] Inspecting remote system: specify ssh connection
 options
In-Reply-To: <moqcnp$6q6$3@ger.gmane.org>
References: <moqcnp$6q6$3@ger.gmane.org>
Message-ID: <55B0BA14.2070805@suse.de>

On 07/23/2015 11:39 AM, Matwey V. Kornilov wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> Is it possible to specify ssh port when running `machinery inspect'? I 
> mean, my ssh port is moved to 2022 on the remote machine, how should I 
> specify -p option for machinery? Unfortunately, I have not found how 
> to do this in the docs.

Currently you cannot directly tell Machinery which port to use.

As Machinery uses ssh, you can adapt your ssh configuration follows:

file: .ssh/config
---- snip ----
Host myhost
   port 2022
---- snip ----

Does that help?

Cheers,
Thomas


>
> _______________________________________________
> Machinery mailing list
> Machinery at lists.suse.com
> http://lists.suse.com/mailman/listinfo/machinery

-- 
SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imend?rffer, Jane Smithard, Dilip Upmanyu, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG N?rnberg)
Maxfeldstra?e 5
90409 N?rnberg
Germany


From matwey.kornilov at gmail.com  Thu Jul 23 04:03:15 2015
From: matwey.kornilov at gmail.com (Matwey V. Kornilov)
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 13:03:15 +0300
Subject: [Machinery] Inspecting remote system: specify ssh connection
	options
In-Reply-To: <55B0BA14.2070805@suse.de>
References: <moqcnp$6q6$3@ger.gmane.org> <55B0BA14.2070805@suse.de>
Message-ID: <moqe53$2to$1@ger.gmane.org>

On 07/23/2015 12:55 PM, Thomas Goettlicher wrote:
> On 07/23/2015 11:39 AM, Matwey V. Kornilov wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> Is it possible to specify ssh port when running `machinery inspect'? I
>> mean, my ssh port is moved to 2022 on the remote machine, how should I
>> specify -p option for machinery? Unfortunately, I have not found how
>> to do this in the docs.
>
> Currently you cannot directly tell Machinery which port to use.
>
> As Machinery uses ssh, you can adapt your ssh configuration follows:
>
> file: .ssh/config
> ---- snip ----
> Host myhost
>    port 2022
> ---- snip ----
>
> Does that help?

Yes it does. Many thanks.

>
> Cheers,
> Thomas
>
>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Machinery mailing list
>> Machinery at lists.suse.com
>> http://lists.suse.com/mailman/listinfo/machinery
>



From matwey.kornilov at gmail.com  Thu Jul 23 04:08:36 2015
From: matwey.kornilov at gmail.com (Matwey V. Kornilov)
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 13:08:36 +0300
Subject: [Machinery] Extract files extracts /home tree
Message-ID: <moqef4$97n$1@ger.gmane.org>


Hi,

I am running machinery-1.11.1 and do the following command to extract 
files to export kiwi:

/usr/bin/machinery inspect --extract-files 
--scope=config-files,changed-managed-files,unmanaged-files --name='name' ip

Then I've found that whole /home tree is also archived and extracted. 
When I do

machinery export-kiwi

then I have tarballs for each user in 
root/tmp/unmanaged_files/trees/home dir.

Is it possible to filter out files from /home at extracting and 
exporting? Sorry, if I missed something obvious.


From tgoettlicher at suse.de  Thu Jul 23 06:19:11 2015
From: tgoettlicher at suse.de (Thomas Goettlicher)
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 14:19:11 +0200
Subject: [Machinery] Extract files extracts /home tree
In-Reply-To: <moqef4$97n$1@ger.gmane.org>
References: <moqef4$97n$1@ger.gmane.org>
Message-ID: <55B0DBBF.1070206@suse.de>



On 07/23/2015 12:08 PM, Matwey V. Kornilov wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I am running machinery-1.11.1 and do the following command to extract 
> files to export kiwi:
>
> /usr/bin/machinery inspect --extract-files 
> --scope=config-files,changed-managed-files,unmanaged-files 
> --name='name' ip
>
> Then I've found that whole /home tree is also archived and extracted. 
> When I do
>
> machinery export-kiwi
>
> then I have tarballs for each user in 
> root/tmp/unmanaged_files/trees/home dir.
>
> Is it possible to filter out files from /home at extracting and 
> exporting? Sorry, if I missed something obvious.

You can pass `--skip-files=/home` in order to not inspect unmanaged 
files in the specified directory:

# machinery inspect --skip-files=/home --extract-files 
--scope=config-files,changed-managed-files,unmanaged-files --name='name' ip

By the way, remote file systems are skipped by default.

Hope that helps,
Thomas

>
> _______________________________________________
> Machinery mailing list
> Machinery at lists.suse.com
> http://lists.suse.com/mailman/listinfo/machinery

-- 
SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imend?rffer, Jane Smithard, Dilip Upmanyu, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG N?rnberg)
Maxfeldstra?e 5
90409 N?rnberg
Germany


From tgoettlicher at suse.de  Thu Jul 23 06:33:40 2015
From: tgoettlicher at suse.de (Thomas Goettlicher)
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 14:33:40 +0200
Subject: [Machinery] Inspecting remote system: machinery user
In-Reply-To: <moqcba$6q6$1@ger.gmane.org>
References: <moqcba$6q6$1@ger.gmane.org>
Message-ID: <55B0DF24.9050401@suse.de>

On 07/23/2015 11:22 AM, Matwey V. Kornilov wrote:
> Hello,
>
> https://github.com/SUSE/machinery/blob/master/man/machinery-inspect.1.md 
> says that:
>
> "When inspecting as non-root the user has to have the following 
> command whitelist given in the sudoers file:
>
> machinery ALL=(ALL) NOPASSWD: 
> /usr/bin/find,/usr/bin/cat,/bin/cat,/usr/bin/rsync,/bin/rpm -V 
> *,/bin/tar --create *"
>
> It would be also great to specify recommended secure way to create 
> machinery user. I've done the following:
>
> machinery:x:492:490::/var/lib/machinery:/bin/bash
>
> but not sure whether it really needs bash as default shell? It would 
> be also great to add such a user to SUSE installations by default in 
> future.
I agree, the requirements for the remote user should be specified. I 
just filed an issue:
https://github.com/SUSE/machinery/issues/1162

Thanks for reporting the lack of documentation,
Thomas

>
> _______________________________________________
> Machinery mailing list
> Machinery at lists.suse.com
> http://lists.suse.com/mailman/listinfo/machinery

-- 
SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imend?rffer, Jane Smithard, Dilip Upmanyu, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG N?rnberg)
Maxfeldstra?e 5
90409 N?rnberg
Germany


From tgoettlicher at suse.de  Thu Jul 23 07:05:43 2015
From: tgoettlicher at suse.de (Thomas Goettlicher)
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 15:05:43 +0200
Subject: [Machinery] Inspecting remote system: ssh access
In-Reply-To: <moqcba$6q6$2@ger.gmane.org>
References: <moqcba$6q6$2@ger.gmane.org>
Message-ID: <55B0E6A7.9020501@suse.de>



On 07/23/2015 11:32 AM, Matwey V. Kornilov wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I've found that when I do
>
> machinery inspect --verbose -n name -r machinery ip
>
> machinery creates an ssh session for every singe command. On the 
> remote side, I see the following (sorry, long log):
>
> Jul 23 09:15:32 linux sshd[24346]: Accepted publickey for machinery 
> from 192.168.10.232 port 44327 ssh2: RSA 
> ad:f5:1f:20:2e:6a:ec:7c:1d:7a:d8:35:71:86:1b:be [MD5]
> Jul 23 09:15:32 linux sshd[24346]: pam_unix(sshd:session): session 
> opened for user machinery by (uid=0)
> Jul 23 09:15:32 linux systemd: pam_unix(systemd-user:session): session 
> opened for user machinery by (uid=0)
> Jul 23 09:15:32 linux sudo: machinery : TTY=unknown ; 
> PWD=/var/lib/machinery ; USER=root ; ENV=LC_ALL=C ; 
> COMMAND=/usr/bin/find 
> /lib/modules/3.16.7-21-default/kernel/drivers/net/ethernet/neterion/vxge 
> -xdev -maxdepth 1 -maxdepth 6 -printf %y\0%P\0%l\0
> Jul 23 09:15:32 linux sudo: pam_unix(sudo:session): session opened for 
> user root by (uid=0)
> Jul 23 09:15:32 linux sudo: pam_unix(sudo:session): session closed for 
> user root
> Jul 23 09:15:32 linux sshd[24350]: Received disconnect from 
> 192.168.10.232: 11: disconnected by user
> Jul 23 09:15:32 linux sshd[24346]: pam_unix(sshd:session): session 
> closed for user machinery
> Jul 23 09:15:32 linux systemd: pam_unix(systemd-user:session): session 
> closed for user machinery
> Jul 23 09:15:33 linux sshd[24381]: Accepted publickey for machinery 
> from 192.168.10.232 port 44328 ssh2: RSA 
> ad:f5:1f:20:2e:6a:ec:7c:1d:7a:d8:35:71:86:1b:be [MD5]
> Jul 23 09:15:33 linux sshd[24381]: pam_unix(sshd:session): session 
> opened for user machinery by (uid=0)
> Jul 23 09:15:33 linux systemd: pam_unix(systemd-user:session): session 
> opened for user machinery by (uid=0)
> Jul 23 09:15:33 linux sudo: machinery : TTY=unknown ; 
> PWD=/var/lib/machinery ; USER=root ; ENV=LC_ALL=C ; 
> COMMAND=/usr/bin/find 
> /lib/modules/3.16.7-21-default/kernel/drivers/net/can/usb/peak_usb 
> -xdev -maxdepth 1 -maxdepth 6 -printf %y\0%P\0%l\0
> Jul 23 09:15:33 linux sudo: pam_unix(sudo:session): session opened for 
> user root by (uid=0)
> Jul 23 09:15:33 linux sudo: pam_unix(sudo:session): session closed for 
> user root
> Jul 23 09:15:33 linux sshd[24385]: Received disconnect from 
> 192.168.10.232: 11: disconnected by user
> Jul 23 09:15:33 linux sshd[24381]: pam_unix(sshd:session): session 
> closed for user machinery
> Jul 23 09:15:33 linux systemd: pam_unix(systemd-user:session): session 
> closed for user machinery
>
> So, this kind of activity (opening and closing thousands of ssh 
> connections) can be mistaken for ssh brute-force or some other kind of 
> malicious network activity. And this is an issue, especially if I 
> inspect machine using ssh connection through the public network. At 
> the specific moment I would be blocked by my network management team.
>
> I don't see limitations to reuse existing ssh connection, are there any?
Thanks for your feedback.

Machinery opens multiple connections because of its current design:
Machinery runs a standard linux command on the remote host and processes 
the command's output. Depending on the result it runs the next command 
on the remote host. That happens again and again. This leads to multiple 
ssh connections.

Let us evaluate what we can do about it.

Cheers,
Thomas

>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Machinery mailing list
> Machinery at lists.suse.com
> http://lists.suse.com/mailman/listinfo/machinery

-- 
SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imend?rffer, Jane Smithard, Dilip Upmanyu, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG N?rnberg)
Maxfeldstra?e 5
90409 N?rnberg
Germany


From machinery at noraa.org.uk  Fri Jul 24 05:27:18 2015
From: machinery at noraa.org.uk (Aaron Wilson)
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2015 12:27:18 +0100
Subject: [Machinery] Help passing unit tests
Message-ID: <20150724112717.GA16278@tactical-grace.oucs.ox.ac.uk>


Dear All,

I've installed machinery into a development environment following the 
README.md in the github repository, but can't make the unit tests
pass (on both openSUSE 13.1 and 13.2).

There is a minor error in the README.md file, in that you need to install:
    libvirt-devel
in order for the Gems to build. However, I can now run machinery
itself, but the unit tests run via:

   rake spec:unit

fail to run.  The error is below, but the problem seems to be that
running `bundle install` has put the rodf library into my home directory,
rather than installing this into the system library path (as with the
other gems).

Can anyone tell me the way to get rodf installed into the system
library path ? 

Thanks,
aaron


Error (from opensuse 13.2):

/usr/bin/ruby.ruby2.1 -I/usr/lib64/ruby/gems/2.1.0/gems/rspec-support-3.2.2/lib:/usr/lib64/ruby/gems/2.1.0/gems/rspec-core-3.2.3/lib /usr/lib64/ruby/gems/2.1.0/gems/rspec-core-3.2.3/exe/rspec --pattern spec/\*\*\{,/\*/\*\*\}/\*_spec.rb  --exclude-pattern spec/integration/\*\*/\*
I, [2015-07-24T12:25:03.315491 #12702]  INFO -- : Not reporting to Code Climate because ENV['CODECLIMATE_REPO_TOKEN'] is not set.
/usr/lib64/ruby/2.1.0/rubygems/core_ext/kernel_require.rb:55:in `require': cannot load such file -- odf/spreadsheet (LoadError)
	from /usr/lib64/ruby/2.1.0/rubygems/core_ext/kernel_require.rb:55:in `require'
	from /home/aaron/github.com/SUSE/machinery/tools/support_matrix/lib/support_matrix/ods_formatter.rb:1:in `<top (required)>'
	from /home/aaron/github.com/SUSE/machinery/tools/support_matrix/lib/support_matrix.rb:2:in `require_relative'
	from /home/aaron/github.com/SUSE/machinery/tools/support_matrix/lib/support_matrix.rb:2:in `<top (required)>'
	from /home/aaron/github.com/SUSE/machinery/spec/unit/spec_helper.rb:24:in `require_relative'
	from /home/aaron/github.com/SUSE/machinery/spec/unit/spec_helper.rb:24:in `<top (required)>'
	from /home/aaron/github.com/SUSE/machinery/spec/helper/merge_users_and_groups_spec.rb:18:in `require_relative'
	from /home/aaron/github.com/SUSE/machinery/spec/helper/merge_users_and_groups_spec.rb:18:in `<top (required)>'
	from /usr/lib64/ruby/gems/2.1.0/gems/rspec-core-3.2.3/lib/rspec/core/configuration.rb:1226:in `load'
	from /usr/lib64/ruby/gems/2.1.0/gems/rspec-core-3.2.3/lib/rspec/core/configuration.rb:1226:in `block in load_spec_files'
	from /usr/lib64/ruby/gems/2.1.0/gems/rspec-core-3.2.3/lib/rspec/core/configuration.rb:1224:in `each'
	from /usr/lib64/ruby/gems/2.1.0/gems/rspec-core-3.2.3/lib/rspec/core/configuration.rb:1224:in `load_spec_files'
	from /usr/lib64/ruby/gems/2.1.0/gems/rspec-core-3.2.3/lib/rspec/core/runner.rb:97:in `setup'
	from /usr/lib64/ruby/gems/2.1.0/gems/rspec-core-3.2.3/lib/rspec/core/runner.rb:85:in `run'
	from /usr/lib64/ruby/gems/2.1.0/gems/rspec-core-3.2.3/lib/rspec/core/runner.rb:70:in `run'
	from /usr/lib64/ruby/gems/2.1.0/gems/rspec-core-3.2.3/lib/rspec/core/runner.rb:38:in `invoke'
	from /usr/lib64/ruby/gems/2.1.0/gems/rspec-core-3.2.3/exe/rspec:4:in `<main>'
/usr/bin/ruby.ruby2.1 -I/usr/lib64/ruby/gems/2.1.0/gems/rspec-support-3.2.2/lib:/usr/lib64/ruby/gems/2.1.0/gems/rspec-core-3.2.3/lib /usr/lib64/ruby/gems/2.1.0/gems/rspec-core-3.2.3/exe/rspec --pattern spec/\*\*\{,/\*/\*\*\}/\*_spec.rb  --exclude-pattern spec/integration/\*\*/\* failed

From mamorales at suse.com  Fri Jul 24 07:45:57 2015
From: mamorales at suse.com (Mauro Morales)
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2015 15:45:57 +0200
Subject: [Machinery] Help passing unit tests
In-Reply-To: <20150724112717.GA16278@tactical-grace.oucs.ox.ac.uk>
References: <20150724112717.GA16278@tactical-grace.oucs.ox.ac.uk>
Message-ID: <55B24195.2010802@suse.com>

Hi Aaron,

Short answer: `bundle exec rake spec:unit`

Long answer:

The issue you see is caused because there is a gem specified on our 
Gemfile using the github: syntax which installs the gem on a bit of a 
different path than the one where all the other gems are installed right 
now.

For the moment you can run the commands with `bundle exec` in front and 
this will take every other scope into account. As soon as a PullRequest 
gets accepted into the Rodf gem, then this won't be necessary any more.

Thanks a lot for trying Machinery out and let us know if there is any 
other way we can make it better.

Cheers,

Mauro

On 07/24/2015 01:27 PM, Aaron Wilson wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> I've installed machinery into a development environment following the
> README.md in the github repository, but can't make the unit tests
> pass (on both openSUSE 13.1 and 13.2).
>
> There is a minor error in the README.md file, in that you need to install:
>      libvirt-devel
> in order for the Gems to build. However, I can now run machinery
> itself, but the unit tests run via:
>
>     rake spec:unit
>
> fail to run.  The error is below, but the problem seems to be that
> running `bundle install` has put the rodf library into my home directory,
> rather than installing this into the system library path (as with the
> other gems).
>
> Can anyone tell me the way to get rodf installed into the system
> library path ?
>
> Thanks,
> aaron
>
>
> Error (from opensuse 13.2):
>
> /usr/bin/ruby.ruby2.1 -I/usr/lib64/ruby/gems/2.1.0/gems/rspec-support-3.2.2/lib:/usr/lib64/ruby/gems/2.1.0/gems/rspec-core-3.2.3/lib /usr/lib64/ruby/gems/2.1.0/gems/rspec-core-3.2.3/exe/rspec --pattern spec/\*\*\{,/\*/\*\*\}/\*_spec.rb  --exclude-pattern spec/integration/\*\*/\*
> I, [2015-07-24T12:25:03.315491 #12702]  INFO -- : Not reporting to Code Climate because ENV['CODECLIMATE_REPO_TOKEN'] is not set.
> /usr/lib64/ruby/2.1.0/rubygems/core_ext/kernel_require.rb:55:in `require': cannot load such file -- odf/spreadsheet (LoadError)
> 	from /usr/lib64/ruby/2.1.0/rubygems/core_ext/kernel_require.rb:55:in `require'
> 	from /home/aaron/github.com/SUSE/machinery/tools/support_matrix/lib/support_matrix/ods_formatter.rb:1:in `<top (required)>'
> 	from /home/aaron/github.com/SUSE/machinery/tools/support_matrix/lib/support_matrix.rb:2:in `require_relative'
> 	from /home/aaron/github.com/SUSE/machinery/tools/support_matrix/lib/support_matrix.rb:2:in `<top (required)>'
> 	from /home/aaron/github.com/SUSE/machinery/spec/unit/spec_helper.rb:24:in `require_relative'
> 	from /home/aaron/github.com/SUSE/machinery/spec/unit/spec_helper.rb:24:in `<top (required)>'
> 	from /home/aaron/github.com/SUSE/machinery/spec/helper/merge_users_and_groups_spec.rb:18:in `require_relative'
> 	from /home/aaron/github.com/SUSE/machinery/spec/helper/merge_users_and_groups_spec.rb:18:in `<top (required)>'
> 	from /usr/lib64/ruby/gems/2.1.0/gems/rspec-core-3.2.3/lib/rspec/core/configuration.rb:1226:in `load'
> 	from /usr/lib64/ruby/gems/2.1.0/gems/rspec-core-3.2.3/lib/rspec/core/configuration.rb:1226:in `block in load_spec_files'
> 	from /usr/lib64/ruby/gems/2.1.0/gems/rspec-core-3.2.3/lib/rspec/core/configuration.rb:1224:in `each'
> 	from /usr/lib64/ruby/gems/2.1.0/gems/rspec-core-3.2.3/lib/rspec/core/configuration.rb:1224:in `load_spec_files'
> 	from /usr/lib64/ruby/gems/2.1.0/gems/rspec-core-3.2.3/lib/rspec/core/runner.rb:97:in `setup'
> 	from /usr/lib64/ruby/gems/2.1.0/gems/rspec-core-3.2.3/lib/rspec/core/runner.rb:85:in `run'
> 	from /usr/lib64/ruby/gems/2.1.0/gems/rspec-core-3.2.3/lib/rspec/core/runner.rb:70:in `run'
> 	from /usr/lib64/ruby/gems/2.1.0/gems/rspec-core-3.2.3/lib/rspec/core/runner.rb:38:in `invoke'
> 	from /usr/lib64/ruby/gems/2.1.0/gems/rspec-core-3.2.3/exe/rspec:4:in `<main>'
> /usr/bin/ruby.ruby2.1 -I/usr/lib64/ruby/gems/2.1.0/gems/rspec-support-3.2.2/lib:/usr/lib64/ruby/gems/2.1.0/gems/rspec-core-3.2.3/lib /usr/lib64/ruby/gems/2.1.0/gems/rspec-core-3.2.3/exe/rspec --pattern spec/\*\*\{,/\*/\*\*\}/\*_spec.rb  --exclude-pattern spec/integration/\*\*/\* failed
> _______________________________________________
> Machinery mailing list
> Machinery at lists.suse.com
> http://lists.suse.com/mailman/listinfo/machinery


From machinery at noraa.org.uk  Fri Jul 24 09:19:10 2015
From: machinery at noraa.org.uk (Aaron Wilson)
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2015 16:19:10 +0100
Subject: [Machinery] Help passing unit tests
In-Reply-To: <55B24195.2010802@suse.com>
References: <20150724112717.GA16278@tactical-grace.oucs.ox.ac.uk>
	<55B24195.2010802@suse.com>
Message-ID: <20150724151910.GA20664@tactical-grace.oucs.ox.ac.uk>

Mauro,

On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 03:45:57PM +0200, Mauro Morales wrote:
> Short answer: `bundle exec rake spec:unit`

Thank you for this and the long explanation.

aaron

From tgoettlicher at suse.de  Fri Jul 31 09:08:19 2015
From: tgoettlicher at suse.de (Thomas Goettlicher)
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2015 17:08:19 +0200
Subject: [Machinery] Machinery 1.11.2 is out!
Message-ID: <55BB8F63.7080005@suse.de>

Hey Machinists,

The Machinery Team just released version 1.11.2 which fixes bugs in the 
command line interface as well as in the HTML view.

We look forward to getting your feedback on Machinery.


The changelog reads as follows:

## Version 1.11.2 - Thu Jul 30 14:42:44 CEST 2015

* Fix issue with showing HTML view when not all file scopes are 
inspected (https://github.com/SUSE/machinery/issues/1150)
* Fix `--all` option of `remove` command 
(https://github.com/SUSE/machinery/issues/1128)


Best,
Thomas
(on behalf of the Machinery Team)

-- 
SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imend?rffer, Jane Smithard, Dilip Upmanyu, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG N?rnberg)
Maxfeldstra?e 5
90409 N?rnberg
Germany