vagrant-spk shouldn't use Sandstorm's default port

[ocdtrekkie]

@abliss specified he has one machine for Sandstorm and vagrant-spk dev. Since Sandstorm defaults to port 6080 and vagrant-spk uses port 6080, it can mean you have to shut down one to use the other. This could be easily avoided, there's really no reason for vagrant-spk to use port 6080. If you do spk dev and vagrant-spk dev on the same machine there's a good chance you'll have your sandstorm dev server interfering with your vagrant-spk and vice versa for really no good reason.

Perhaps we could adjust vagrant-spk to use port 6090 which is not listed in IANA as a registered port.

[ocdtrekkie]

Question to answer: Is there a programmatic/silent install way to select a different port when installing Sandstorm, and is that why it does this at present?

[ocdtrekkie]

Yup. Currently it's install.sh -d -e but we could change this by going install.sh -d -e -p 6090 in vagrant-spk (and then presumably editing everywhere else in this repo and the dev docs it specifies 6080).

[ocdtrekkie]

There is actually a lot of discussion of port conflict in https://docs.sandstorm.io/en/latest/vagrant-spk/packaging-tutorial/ regarding stopping a local Sandstorm server first, shutting down other vagrant-spk instances, etc. and specifies very blatantly that vagrant-spk ALWAYS uses port 6080.

Which is to say, I wonder if anyone would have a very strong opinion against changing this, because there's definitely been plenty of running into it in the past. Maybe @paulproteus or @zarvox has an enlightening historical opinion.

[ocdtrekkie]

In #19, Asheesh suggested some possible solutions. But I think we could reduce "sandstorm or another vagrant-spk instance is already using port 6080" to just "another vagrant-spk instance is already using port 6090" by giving it it's own port.

[ocdtrekkie]

Adam's solution here: dwrensha/gitweb-sandstorm@47bc94b#diff-55b3c64db8162c25e7425d87429d0bf8R36 is lovingly straightforward as it leaves everything in the VM on 6080, and we will only use 6090 on the host, where conflicts occur.

I'll do this, but I need to make sure I update any commentary and documentation at the same time.

[abliss]

NB it's not as straightforward as it may seem, since if you then point a browser to `http://localhost:6090`, sandstorm will complain that you have the wrong URL. For me this wasn't an issue since I was on a remote machine anyway, and had to set up an ssh tunnel (like `ssh -L6080:localhost:6090 abliss@host_running_vm`), but this is an extra complexity to describe in the docs. Possibly this could be special-cased somewhere sandstorm itself, such that if it sees the url `localhost:6090` and is expecting `localhost:6080`, everything could still work?

[ocdtrekkie]

Nah, it’s not super complicated to also install Sandstorm with port 6090 as described in the comment above. I just assumed whatever you did in GitWeb would work, and didn’t really think about that problem. vagrant-spk should never introduce a feature that demands Sandstorm handles it in some special way.

…

-- Jacob Weisz inbox@jacobweisz.com

On Wed, Feb 5, 2020, at 10:13 PM, Adam Bliss wrote: NB it's not as straightforward as it may seem, since if you then point a browser to `http://localhost:6090`, sandstorm will complain that you have the wrong URL. For me this wasn't an issue since I was on a remote machine anyway, and had to set up an ssh tunnel (like `ssh -L6080:localhost:6090 ***@***.***_running_vm`), but this is an extra complexity to describe in the docs. Possibly this could be special-cased somewhere sandstorm itself, such that if it sees the url `localhost:6090` and is expecting `localhost:6080`, everything could still work? — You are receiving this because you were assigned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#243?email_source=notifications&email_token=ABBSDCZR5QURFAVG5XWA7BLRBOE7XA5CNFSM4KJ3MOS2YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOEK53V4A#issuecomment-582728432>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABBSDCZBPYJG2JW5SEM2HR3RBOE7XANCNFSM4KJ3MOSQ>.

[paulproteus]

I dimly recall that Sandstorm might support a comma to listen on multiple ports, like PORT=6090,6080 .

…

[ocdtrekkie]

@paulproteus Yeah, I don't think we'll need to use that here though. We can install Sandstorm using port 6090 inside the VM and also pass port 6090 through the VM as 6090, and ensure we know anyone talking about 6080 is talking Sandstorm and 6090 is talking vagrant-spk.

And neither will be changed for existing users, who will get the existing functionality, unless they use upgradevm, which replaces both the Vagrantfile and the global-setup where Sandstorm is installed into the VM.

[zenhack]

Agreed, we should just set the port in the VM to 6090 unconditionally.