Added a gerrit trigger plugin in the jenkins. While setting up a gerrit server within the gerrit trigger configuration, I cannot remove the server already configured. It simply says
Cannot remove the last server!
But I can edit the server details. Anyone has faced this issue?
Jenkins ver. 1.653
gerrit trigger version 2.21.1
I dont have any job configured with Gerrit Trigger, and this jenkins is a fresh instance. Just have a test job
There are must be some error in that gerrit server config section.
You can shutdown the tomcat if your jenkins was hold by tomcat, or shutdown the jenkins what ever.
Then goto /home/$yourname/.jenkins , edit gerrit-trigger.xml remove the server section. then restart jenkins and check it.
I just found it works.
By the words what I understand is that I cannot remove the last, the final server. That means there should be at least one server configured, I cannot remove all of them. If you want to remove this, you have to create one more and delete the older one.
But not sure why it is so
Related
Our Company used to self-host GitLab for source-code management and configured webhook on gitlab to trigger all the project pipelines on jenkins. Initially, the gitlab url was 'https://git.fulcrumdigital.com' and later for an upgraded version, they changed url to 'https://autobuild.fulcrumdigital.com'
Recently, we migrated to 'github.com' and created an organization. The source codes for various projects are found under this organization, which is private. Now, when I try to configure webhooks for these projects, I see that they deliver as intended to jenkins, but jenkins doesn't trigger the respective project's build. Instead, it gives out a message as shown below.
jenkins-github webhook error
I don't find any info regarding this webhook on global configuration page.
Here is a snapshot of jenkins logs
jenkins logs
I don't face this webhook issue for newly created pipeline-projects on jenkins. I face this issue for older pipeline-projects that already had their webhook configured earlier for gitlab.
Help me to resolve this issue and make jenkins trigger build from github webhook for older pipeline-projects.
Did you try force regenerating the webhooks?
Go to Manage Jenkins > Configure System > GitHub plugin > Advance > Re-registers hooks for all jobs.
I had this problem myself. The first thing you want to do is go to Manage Jenkins -> Configure System scroll down to the GitHub section and click on "Advanced". You will see this:
It's important to have access to your Jenkins log (I'm running Jenkins with Docker). When I clicked on Re-register hooks for all jobs, I got the following error:
In my case, the error mentioned something with my access token. So, I checked my Github personal access token and it turned out, I need to turn on Read and Write for Webhook:
Now, go back to Jenkins and click on Re-register hooks for all jobs again, and on the next push, the build was automatically triggered.
My TeamCity CI has the plugin GitHub Commit Hooks provided by Jetbrains to detect new pull requests and trigger a run. I've installed this plugin and configured it clicking here:
After that, the web hook is created on GitHub but the address is 0000:8111 which is wrong. So I change to the correct DNS and redeliver the request.
It seems to work, the server returns 202 with the message Scheduled checking for changes for 2 VCS roots. (Server time: 20180615T122359.142+0100) but the trigger is not working.
After a while another problem happens, the server starts rejecting the requests and GitHub returns this:
No stored auth data (secret key) found for public key "72WE45221-19fe-433b-9265-66b2168EW6c". Seems hook created not by this TeamCity server. Reinstall hook via TeamCity UI.
Environment:
TeamCity version: 2017.2.4 (build 51228)
GitHub Commit Hooks version: 62
What I can do to solve this issue? Is there any issue with my DNS?
EDIT 1:
Now I am able to trigger the build by commits and solved the secret key issue. But pull requests are not triggering the CI.
To solve the secret key issue, you need to change the Server URL on Global Settings.
A bit of a workaround, but have you tried using a VCS trigger to detect and build pull requests rather than a commit hook? This works the same as any other VCS check in trigger, so if your current configuration is already detecting VCS changes from Github it should be more straightforward to setup.
Pull requests on Github are automatically referenced using the following pattern +:refs/pull/*/head so with a VCS branch specification you can have a TeamCity build project that's dedicated to building pull requests.
See https://blog.jetbrains.com/teamcity/2013/02/automatically-building-pull-requests-from-github-with-teamcity/
I had a similar issue; the solution is to change the TC installation's settings so it's aware of its correct URL, and then re-adding the webhook through the plugin. The setting in question is Administration > Server Administration > Global Settings > Server Url:
I have a 'master' server (docker container actually) where I want to install Jenkins in order to link it (with webhook) with a github repo, so every time a developer pushes code, jenkins will auto-pull and build the code.
The thing is that there are an arbitrary number of extra 'slave' servers that need to have the exact same code as the master.
I am thinking of writing an Ansible playbook to be executed by Jenkins everytime the webhook runs and send the code to the slaves.
Can Jenkins do something like this?
Do I need to make the same setup to all the slaves with Jenkins and webhooks?
EDIT:
I want to run a locustio master server on the server that is going to have jenkins. My load tests are going to be pulled from Github there, but the same code needs to reside in the slaves in order to run in distributed mode.
The short answer to your question is that Jenkins certainly has the ability to run Ansible playbooks. You can add a build-step to the project that is receiving the web hook that will run the playbook.
jenkins could trigger another job even on slaves. Then if i get correctly your issue , you just need something like that. https://wiki.jenkins-ci.org/display/JENKINS/Parameterized+Remote+Trigger+Plugin
You could build your job by name trigger. Also there is another useful plugin called artifactory. This manages your packages and serves. This mean , you can build your code for once and share to slave and slaves could access your build and runs job.
For whatever range of poor reasons...a user schedule workflow has been uploaded to our YouTrack server instance that now automatically generates seemingly hundreds of new issues a minute.
As you might imagine, the web server is totally unresponsive, meaning that we cannot disable or detach the workflow from the project. The workflow editor's attempts to remove the workflow fail with connection timeouts.
How can the workflow be disabled without accessing the usual admin pages? Is there a workflow file somewhere in the server's directory that can be deleted (I can't find one) while the service is stopped? Is there a "run in safe-mode" option for YouTrack?
We're running YouTrack 5 fwiw.
Thanks in advance.
In YouTrack 6.0 we've implemented special Java start parameter (-Djetbrains.youtrack.workflow.detachModified=true), it will work starting from next bug fix release.
This option will detach all the workflows from all the projects on start, except the unmodified supplied ones.
Please, consider https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/JT-27785, the Fix version of this issue will be changes as soon as we release next bug fix.
Workflows are stored inside YT db, so the best variant for you is to contact YT support. It'll be able to modify the db.
We are a team that works on liferay in eclipse.
We want to code in our clients but when we want to compile or deploy our code, this process done by server(to lower usage of clients and send main process to server).
How this can be possible?
You can use the Rundeck plugin for Jenkins to trigger a deploy based on the SCM commit message.
So your team would code and commit to a repository. Jenkins will then compile and deploy the latest build on the server.
BUT: I think I'd prefer to run my code on my client before committing it.