Starting from init.d seems to ignore TAHOEHOME in /etc/default/tahoe-lafs

[amontero]

I have a node and an introducer running on my Ubuntu Lucid. I configure run-as-daemon the user in /etc/default/tahoe-lafs . If my autostarting node lives in ~/.tahoe (or if I symlink it) everything works OK.

However, if I configure TAHOEHOME to another dir, tahoe fails to start. When invoking "sudo /etc/init.d/tahoe-lafs start", I get the following output:

* Starting Tahoe-LAFS tahoe

'/home/amontero/.tahoe' does not look like a directory at all

I tried absolute and relative paths and it makes no difference. The error message makes me think that tahoe is ingnoring the TAHOEHOME setting.

I'm using the i2p ppa tahoe 1.8.3 version. Can anybody confirm if this is really a bug or some misunderstanding of mine?

Thanks.

[davidsarah]

Upstream Tahoe-LAFS does not use any TAHOEHOME environment variable setting. I don't know whether the i2p ppa changes that. Where did you see documentation that mentions TAHOEHOME?

[amontero]

Hmmm... I see. As the bottom-most comment in ​http://forum.i2p2.de/viewtopic.php?t=5490 says it's a i2p patch. Sorry, I thought it was in upstream, too. So, I can convert this ticket in a feature request if you think it's worth it, or report it in launchpad.

The TAHOEHOME is mentioned inside the /etc/default/tahoe-lafs file:

#RUN_DAEMON="No"
RUN_DAEMON="yes"

# Who to run the tahoe process as
#TAHOEUSER=""
TAHOEUSER="amontero"

# Where is the tahoe node directory?
# If you didn't specify a node directory when running "tahoe create-client",
# the node directory is "/home/yourusername/.tahoe"
#
# If you'd like to have the storage elsewhere, enter it here:
#TAHOEHOME=""
TAHOEHOME="/home/amontero/Dropbox/tahoe/kinton-intro/"

[zooko]

#1401 is a request to add the feature to tahoe-lafs upstream of using a env var to specify the node dir.

[amontero]

I've just reported it to i2p trac at: ​http://trac.i2p2.de/ticket/598

[killyourtv]

Sorry for the troubles.

I'll be uploading a fixed package shortly (and I'll close this bug since it's not a problem in tahoe-lafs itself but a third-party's (my) mistake).

I've added a note to my PPA's infobox that packaging issues should be reported to me.

[zooko]

No problem! Thanks for the work you do! I would like for the delta between upstream tahoe-lafs and i2p tahoe-lafs to get narrower, such as by us accepting patches that you have hitherto maintained. If you're interested in that, please find a ticket on the tahoe-lafs trac asking for a feature, and attach your patch to it, or if there's not already a ticket then open a new ticket asking for that feature and attach your patch. Obviously, we may end up having different preferences about something, but we might agree on how to solve some of your issues in upstream tahoe-lafs, or failing that, at the very least we can learn from each other by discussing them, and leave a permanent record in the trac of why we did what we did.

[killyourtv]

I would like the delta to be small as well. :)

I created my packages before tahoe-lafs was added to debian's repository (and I didn't notice the misc/debian directory in the tahoe source tarball at the time). I'll compare my "handiwork" with Debian's. My debian/rules file is pretty basic since I use "dh" (part of ​debhelper >7).

I'd guess that the main differences are probably that I include patches from #1007 & #1010, but in November I started including the multiple introducer patchset from #68.