[BUG] new LXCs TOFU - Are you sure you want to continue connecting (yes/no/[fingerprint])?

[esi_y]

No one else has issues with new LXCs when connected to the GUI of a node that they are NOT running on CONSTANTLY being asked to TOFU (trust-on-first-use)?

The new helper is used everywhere (not that I am vouching for it), but in LXC. First Qdevice was forgotten, now this. This should win top regression-by-design prize of 2024.

EDIT:

Ok ... now I have seen how this change was MacGyver'd in other Perl components.

So this is hilarious once more with Proxmox QA quality. This code is now in "enterprise" repo for quite some time now, isn't it?

Basically, at this point, I am at a loss with this, I suggest to file a BZ. Everyone suggests it here for these cases, but I am not doing it anymore - when I file it and e.g. try to point out to the codepath (I am doing their job), I get snarky answers from the developer why it was not a bug instead of prompt fix. When I submit a patch, it's ignored. If I were to submit this completely rewritten, they would ask me to sign NON-FREE license to gift it to them. Before that, they would argue at lengths why they are doing it better with MacGyver and NOT corporate best practice. Never heard a thank you for reporting a pesky bug or an apology for taking the userbase as free testers.

People should NOT pay money for getting support on sloppy code (that happens) AND sloppy QA. The QA does not exist or should the user base be salaried for it instead?

Came from here.

 

[t.lamprecht]

This is going nowhere, and you seem to think you're being held hostage to continue using our projects, but we're certainly not forcing you to.
You're using the work of Proxmox and all contributors 100% for free (as in free beer and freedom) and yet all you do is demand and complain while hijacking every thread to make it about you and spread FUD and alienate not only Proxmox staff but long term community users as this is the Proxmox Community Support Forum, not a personal therapy session, and after countless attempts, one very open and very recent, you still show that you learn nothing and continue to flame and troll.

Well, now you'll have to do it on another platform; you are hereby excluded from all our channels, something we do not decide lightly (in the last ten years two users have been banned, they used less sophisticated flaming/trolling and more direct insults, which made it easier/faster), but we see no other way to avoid exhausting all staff and tanking their productivity by having to respond to various allegations and FUD.

Anyway, be assured that this exclusion is certainly not because of talking about bugs, we and other users do that daily and completely in the open. And neither is it talking about our 100% open license, or our upfront communicated CLA, which ensures a legal basis for our projects to be released, while allowing us to accept external contributors to spearhead their use cases, and still giving everyone a full outbound guarantee that their work will always be available under the original open source license, and is prominently documented in the developer documentation, which is very easy for anyone to find before starting any work, e.g. if they are simply not happy with the CLA or the AGPLv3, nobody is forced here.

The exclusion is purely and 100% based on your behavior, sealioning, bad-faith argumentation picking apart every reply in fragments and out of context, i.e. flaming & trolling, plus necro-bumping, and hijacking others threads in a just brutally disrespectful manner, and that after being told countless times to stop, we really gave you more than a few chances.

Again and in short: not the topics, but your behavior is the reason here.

You can, and sadly I think you will, spread FUD about our projects elsewhere based on this; that's up to those platforms, and we couldn't care less, but rest assured, the implication that this was some conspiracy based on talking about certain topics is simply a lie, and if you really think your time is best spent dragging a project that has been releasing 100% FLOSS projects for 19 years, then so be it. We have our track record of releasing and contributing to FLOSS, but, and now I'm speaking personally, I'm really not so sure about yours.

Oh, and w.r.t. this thread: yes there can be things improved, this is a small issue in our biggest project PVE and we will improve it like always, but there's no need to blow this out of proportion trying to zugzwang force staff for some public statement like the OP frequently does, well did.