Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Connect to already running daemon #182

Closed
hacdias opened this issue Jan 11, 2018 · 11 comments
Closed

Connect to already running daemon #182

hacdias opened this issue Jan 11, 2018 · 11 comments
Assignees
Labels
exp/expert Having worked on the specific codebase is important help wanted Seeking public contribution on this issue P1 High: Likely tackled by core team if no one steps up

Comments

@hacdias
Copy link
Member

hacdias commented Jan 11, 2018

After talking to @dryajov, we noticed that ipfsd-ctl doesn't connect to already running daemons. This code:

DaemonFactory.create().spawn({
  repoPath: "/a/beautiful/path",
  disposable: false,
  init: false,
  start: false
}, (err, node) => { console.log(node.started) })

Should print true if the there was a daemon on that repo and node.api should be populated. 😄

@daviddias
Copy link
Member

@hacdias this is only on the latest version that hasn't been merged right? Namely #176 ? Was this a feature that you use in the current released version? If so it is a regression and #176 shouldn't be merged until it is fixed.

@hacdias can you add a test for it on the PR?

@daviddias daviddias added the P1 High: Likely tackled by core team if no one steps up label Jan 12, 2018
@hacdias
Copy link
Member Author

hacdias commented Jan 12, 2018

@diasdavid I don't know if the current version can connect to already running daemons. I have tried but it didn't seem to work neither with master, nor with #176

@dryajov
Copy link
Member

dryajov commented Jan 12, 2018

@diasdavid this functionality wasn't present in the previous versions either.

@daviddias
Copy link
Member

Ok, no blocker then :)

@daviddias daviddias added status/ready Ready to be worked help wanted Seeking public contribution on this issue exp/expert Having worked on the specific codebase is important labels Jan 25, 2018
@hacdias
Copy link
Member Author

hacdias commented Mar 11, 2018

Any progresses on this @dryajov? If you didn't start, I can try to look at the code and see what I can do.

@dryajov
Copy link
Member

dryajov commented Mar 11, 2018

Go for it - I haven't been able to get to it yet.

@daviddias
Copy link
Member

@hacdias 👍 for me as well. Definitely make sure to create a good error for in-proc nodes given that there is no way for two clients to connect to it.

@dryajov
Copy link
Member

dryajov commented Mar 16, 2018

@hacdias have you already started on this, if not I can give it a go now.

@hacdias
Copy link
Member Author

hacdias commented Mar 20, 2018

@dryajov no, I haven't. Sorry for the late response.

@dryajov
Copy link
Member

dryajov commented Mar 20, 2018

I just did - #221

@daviddias
Copy link
Member

👏🏽👏🏽

@ghost ghost removed the status/ready Ready to be worked label Mar 21, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
exp/expert Having worked on the specific codebase is important help wanted Seeking public contribution on this issue P1 High: Likely tackled by core team if no one steps up
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants