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

tip: Make sure you only have one instance of IPFS running #9

Open
depatchedmode opened this issue Feb 13, 2024 · 3 comments
Open

tip: Make sure you only have one instance of IPFS running #9

depatchedmode opened this issue Feb 13, 2024 · 3 comments
Labels
bug Something isn't working ipfs

Comments

@depatchedmode
Copy link
Contributor

Also from Brook's clean install:

$ homestar start -c ./settings.toml
ts=2024-01-30T22:00:28.151813Z level=info target=homestar
# ...snip...
thread 'main' panicked at homestar-runtime/src/main.rs:56:41:
Failed to start runtime: Address already in use (os error 48)
note: run with `RUST_BACKTRACE=1` environment variable to display a backtrace

What can we highlight, generally, from this error to help people realize they might have two instances of IPFS running? In Brook's case she had the kubo daemon running as well as IPFS desktop.

@zeeshanlakhani
Copy link

@depatchedmode In this case, you can check for something running at the default port of the settings or have the system check for an IPFS running already. We do this in the cat lines example for homestar. Homestar does run with configurable IPFS host/port API, so that's something to make sure is the same for both.

@bmann bmann added bug Something isn't working ipfs labels Feb 13, 2024
@bmann
Copy link
Contributor

bmann commented Feb 13, 2024

For the Fission CLI tools, we fully puppet-ted IPFS on a separate / non default port. I'm NOT proposing we do that...until / if we decide to fully bundle in the future.

We may want to not have Homestar do anything about IPFS and the only thing we do is config on which port it is running? And the error is "no IPFS node found at port XXXX defined in "

I think I just said the same thing as @zeeshanlakhani with different words :)

@bmann
Copy link
Contributor

bmann commented Feb 13, 2024

@matheus23 points out we'll have rs-car-mirror soon, which means no local IPFS required --> does sync of bits over https

@expede had incepted 18 Nix shells and who knows what else, so also likely not a common pattern :)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working ipfs
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants