Need /etc/sysctl.d/10-juju.conf

I think we need to create d/juju-2.0.sysctl with
   fs.inotify.max_user_watches = 524288
   fs.inotify.max_user_instances = 256

then add this to to d/rules:
    install -m 644 -D debian/juju-2.0.sysctl debian/juju-2.0/etc/sysctl.d/10-juju.conf

Please ship it in /usr/lib/sysctl.d/ instead of /etc/.

Also, shouldn't this rather be shipped by lxd itself? Trying to guess every *user* of lxd sounds wrong, and if multiple consumers start shipping such snippets they might even collide on files.

This is pending next upload into the archive, but will be available in the GA version of juju that will appear in the stable ppa.

Hello Michael, or anyone else affected,

Accepted juju-core into yakkety-proposed. The package will build now and be available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/juju-core/2.0.0-0ubuntu0.16.10.1 in a few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.

Please help us by testing this new package. See https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation how to enable and use -proposed. Your feedback will aid us getting this update out to other Ubuntu users.

If this package fixes the bug for you, please add a comment to this bug, mentioning the version of the package you tested, and change the tag from verification-needed to verification-done. If it does not fix the bug for you, please add a comment stating that, and change the tag to verification-failed. In either case, details of your testing will help us make a better decision.

Further information regarding the verification process can be found at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/PerformingSRUVerification . Thank you in advance!

Hello Michael, or anyone else affected,

Accepted juju-core into xenial-proposed. The package will build now and be available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/juju-core/2.0.0-0ubuntu0.16.04.1 in a few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.

Please help us by testing this new package. See https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation how to enable and use -proposed. Your feedback will aid us getting this update out to other Ubuntu users.

If this package fixes the bug for you, please add a comment to this bug, mentioning the version of the package you tested, and change the tag from verification-needed to verification-done. If it does not fix the bug for you, please add a comment stating that, and change the tag to verification-failed. In either case, details of your testing will help us make a better decision.

Further information regarding the verification process can be found at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/PerformingSRUVerification . Thank you in advance!

Updating to say this works properly in xenial, but not in yakkety. Yakkety is missing the sysctl file; it's not installed. This needs to be corrected in the debian/rules.

The tags should be v-done-xenial and v-failed-yakkety.

Hello Michael, or anyone else affected,

Accepted juju-core into yakkety-proposed. The package will build now and be available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/juju-core/2.0.0-0ubuntu0.16.10.2 in a few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.

Please help us by testing this new package. See https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation how to enable and use -proposed. Your feedback will aid us getting this update out to other Ubuntu users.

If this package fixes the bug for you, please add a comment to this bug, mentioning the version of the package you tested, and change the tag from verification-needed to verification-done. If it does not fix the bug for you, please add a comment stating that, and change the tag to verification-failed. In either case, details of your testing will help us make a better decision.

Further information regarding the verification process can be found at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/PerformingSRUVerification . Thank you in advance!

Hello Michael, or anyone else affected,

Accepted juju-core into yakkety-proposed. The package will build now and be available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/juju-core/2.0.0-0ubuntu0.16.10.3 in a few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.

Please help us by testing this new package. See https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation how to enable and use -proposed. Your feedback will aid us getting this update out to other Ubuntu users.

If this package fixes the bug for you, please add a comment to this bug, mentioning the version of the package you tested, and change the tag from verification-needed to verification-done. If it does not fix the bug for you, please add a comment stating that, and change the tag to verification-failed. In either case, details of your testing will help us make a better decision.

Further information regarding the verification process can be found at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/PerformingSRUVerification . Thank you in advance!

Deploying those ridiculously low parameters in /usr/lib/sysctl.d/juju-2.0.conf prevent to override in /etc/sysctl.conf as one should expect ..

Please revert this setup it prevents to use juju on lxd at all and is not coherent with :
https://github.com/lxc/lxd/blob/master/doc/production-setup.md

@Nicolas, /usr/lib/sysctl.d/ does override /etc/sysctl.conf. Note, these settings are already an increase from the default. These are lower values than in the wiki, but are deemed safe enough to deploy to all users. You should absolutely bump these values should you wish to run a more production environment. That wiki page suggest modifying /etc/sysctl.conf. I would suggest not modifying that file directly, and instead adding something to /usr/lib/sysctl.d/.

We can also inform folks of the existence of this file so folks don't fall over. If you make changes to the values, indeed you no longer want the juju default settings used. Let's improve that page to help make these clear. Any other suggestions? I would expect someone wanting to set there own settings to modify or remove the juju.conf.

Works properly for yakkety. juju.conf installed and values set properly.

This bug was fixed in the package juju-core - 2.0.0-0ubuntu0.16.10.3

---------------
juju-core (2.0.0-0ubuntu0.16.10.3) yakkety; urgency=medium

  * debian/control: Fix the build failure due to dependency issues.
    (LP: #1617440)
    - Nope, we really don't want a Build-Depends on golang-github-coreos-go-
      systemd-dev.
    - Drop golang-go.crypto from Build-Depends.

juju-core (2.0.0-0ubuntu0.16.10.2) yakkety; urgency=medium

  * Restore golang-github-coreos-go-systemd-dev
  * Fix missing dh_install for sysctl file (LP: #1631038)

juju-core (2.0.0-0ubuntu0.16.10.1) yakkety; urgency=medium

  * New upstream release 2.0.0 (LP: #1617440)
  * d/copyright updated for 2.0.0 vendored packages.
  * Add sysctl files for lxd provider (LP: #1631038)
  * Update d/watch file
  * Add upstream signing key
  * Restore golang-golang-x-[crypto,net]-dev dependencies
  * Update bootstrap order for autpopkgtests for juju cli changes

 -- Mathieu Trudel-Lapierre <email address hidden> Thu, 03 Nov 2016 11:51:54 -0600

The verification of the Stable Release Update for juju-core has completed successfully and the package has now been released to -updates. Subsequently, the Ubuntu Stable Release Updates Team is being unsubscribed and will not receive messages about this bug report. In the event that you encounter a regression using the package from -updates please report a new bug using ubuntu-bug and tag the bug report regression-update so we can easily find any regressions.

This bug was fixed in the package juju-core - 2.0.0-0ubuntu0.16.04.2

---------------
juju-core (2.0.0-0ubuntu0.16.04.2) xenial; urgency=medium

  * DPKG_MAINTSCRIPT_ARCH doesn't work in .config, use dpkg check (LP: #1614969)

 -- Nicholas Skaggs <email address hidden> Mon, 31 Oct 2016 15:55:49 -0400