{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/ansible-semaphore/semaphore/issues/538","repository_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/ansible-semaphore/semaphore","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/ansible-semaphore/semaphore/issues/538/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/ansible-semaphore/semaphore/issues/538/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/ansible-semaphore/semaphore/issues/538/events","html_url":"https://github.com/ansible-semaphore/semaphore/issues/538","id":321219646,"number":538,"title":"Bind semaphore on local interface in v2.5.0 does not work","user":{"login":"Twim4","id":38788499,"avatar_url":"https://avatars3.githubusercontent.com/u/38788499?v=4","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/Twim4","html_url":"https://github.com/Twim4","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Twim4/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Twim4/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Twim4/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Twim4/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Twim4/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Twim4/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Twim4/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Twim4/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Twim4/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"assignees":[],"milestone":null,"comments":2,"created_at":"2018-05-08T14:50:21Z","updated_at":"2018-05-08T17:48:13Z","closed_at":null,"author_association":"NONE","body":"Hi\r\n\r\nI am trying to bind semaphore to loopback interface like it was possible in previous v2.4.1 with config entry like:\r\n\r\n<pre>\r\n{\r\n        \"mysql\": {\r\n                \"host\": \"127.0.0.1:3306\",\r\n                \"user\": \"xxxxx\",\r\n                \"pass\": \"xxxxx\",\r\n                \"name\": \"xxxxx\"\r\n        },\r\n        \"port\": \"127.0.0.1:3000\",\r\n...\r\n</pre>\r\n\r\nAfter semaphore upgrade from 2.4.1 to 2.5.0 the local interface binding is not working anymore:\r\n\r\n<pre>\r\n# semaphore -version\r\nv2.5.0\r\n</pre>\r\nafter service restart i'm  receiving following error message:\r\n\r\n<pre>\r\nSemaphore v2.5.0\r\nPort :127.0.0.1:3000\r\nMySQL semaphore@127.0.0.1:3306 semaphore\r\nTmp Path (projects home) /opt/semaphore\r\nChecking DB migrations\r\ntime=\"2018-05-08T15:52:22+02:00\" level=panic msg=\"listen tcp: address :127.0.0.1:3000: too many colons in address\"\r\npanic: (*logrus.Entry) (0x9eefc0,0xc42027e5a0)\r\n</pre>\r\n\r\nMaybe it would be a good idea to implement such parameter like \"(bind_)ip\": \"0.0.0.0\" or something similar.\r\n\r\nDoes somebody know some workaround for this issue to be able to bind it to local interface?\r\n\r\nThanks!"},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/ansible-semaphore/semaphore/issues/comments/387485852","html_url":"https://github.com/ansible-semaphore/semaphore/issues/538#issuecomment-387485852","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/ansible-semaphore/semaphore/issues/538","id":387485852,"user":{"login":"twhiston","id":17698613,"avatar_url":"https://avatars2.githubusercontent.com/u/17698613?v=4","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/twhiston","html_url":"https://github.com/twhiston","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/twhiston/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/twhiston/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/twhiston/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/twhiston/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/twhiston/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/twhiston/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/twhiston/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/twhiston/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/twhiston/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2018-05-08T17:48:13Z","updated_at":"2018-05-08T17:48:13Z","author_association":"MEMBER","body":"Your use case is totally valid and i'm happy to support it, but we will need to add a new field rather than revert the port field fix. \r\nAs a temp workaround you can always compile it without that check as we only do it in one place (config.go L197), but in the long term we need a proper solution. It would actually be really simple as we only use the port in a few places. I would of course be very happy to accept a PR if you want to make one."}}
{"actor":{"display_login":"twhiston"}}