starred/netbox
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox.git synced 2026-01-11 21:10:29 +01:00
Code Issues 273 Packages Projects Releases 10 Wiki Activity

No active configuration revision found #11779

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 21:49:46 +01:00 by adam · 5 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:49:46 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @alehaa on GitHub (Oct 26, 2025).

Originally assigned to: @pheus on GitHub.

NetBox Edition

NetBox Community

NetBox Version

v4.4.4

Python Version

3.12

Steps to Reproduce

  1. Start new NetBox instance (empty).
  2. View logs.

Expected Behavior

The log shows informational messages and HTTP access.

Observed Behavior

Most HTTP access log messages are preceded by a warning about configuration revisions.

No active configuration revision found - falling back to most recent
::1 - - [26/Oct/2025:13:28:18 +0000] "GET /login/ HTTP/1.1" 200 3906 "-" "curl/8.5.0"

This is due to a change introduced by 7719b98, which added a warning when no active configuration revision was found. However, not using configuration revisions and incorporating all configurations into Python files is a valid scenario. Therefore, I suggest switching from a warning message to debug message.

Originally created by @alehaa on GitHub (Oct 26, 2025). Originally assigned to: @pheus on GitHub. ### NetBox Edition NetBox Community ### NetBox Version v4.4.4 ### Python Version 3.12 ### Steps to Reproduce 1. Start new NetBox instance (empty). 2. View logs. ### Expected Behavior The log shows informational messages and HTTP access. ### Observed Behavior Most HTTP access log messages are preceded by a warning about configuration revisions. ``` No active configuration revision found - falling back to most recent ::1 - - [26/Oct/2025:13:28:18 +0000] "GET /login/ HTTP/1.1" 200 3906 "-" "curl/8.5.0" ``` This is due to a change introduced by 7719b98, which added a warning when no active configuration revision was found. However, not using configuration revisions and incorporating all configurations into Python files is a valid scenario. Therefore, I suggest switching from a warning message to debug message.
adam added the type: bugstatus: acceptednetboxseverity: low labels 2025-12-29 21:49:46 +01:00
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 21:49:47 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:49:48 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jnovinger commented on GitHub (Oct 28, 2025):

@DanSheps, thoughts on this? Any objection to changing the log-level? I don't think we talked about it during code review, so just want to be sure before I accept it as a housekeeping issue.

@jnovinger commented on GitHub (Oct 28, 2025): @DanSheps, thoughts on this? Any objection to changing the log-level? I don't think we talked about it during code review, so just want to be sure before I accept it as a housekeeping issue.
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:49:48 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@DanSheps commented on GitHub (Oct 28, 2025):

Yeah, no concerns from me. May even be worth it to break out the multiple objects and does not exist separately and try and gracefully handle that one.

@DanSheps commented on GitHub (Oct 28, 2025): Yeah, no concerns from me. May even be worth it to break out the multiple objects and does not exist separately and try and gracefully handle that one.
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:49:48 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@andrekeller commented on GitHub (Oct 31, 2025):

This also seems to affect the housekeeping management command, which now is noisy as this is outputed to stderr

@andrekeller commented on GitHub (Oct 31, 2025): This also seems to affect the housekeeping management command, which now is noisy as this is outputed to stderr
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:49:48 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jnovinger commented on GitHub (Nov 1, 2025):

I'm going to accept this as is for now, to tone down the logging as described in the original report. Dan, if you have thoughts on other things you'd like to cleaneup, can you create a housekeeping issue for them?

@jnovinger commented on GitHub (Nov 1, 2025): I'm going to accept this as is for now, to tone down the logging as described in the original report. Dan, if you have thoughts on other things you'd like to cleaneup, can you create a housekeeping issue for them?
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:49:48 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@pheus commented on GitHub (Nov 6, 2025):

I'd be happy to contribute the fix. Can you please assign it to me? Thanks

@pheus commented on GitHub (Nov 6, 2025): I'd be happy to contribute the fix. Can you please assign it to me? Thanks
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag Specified
Branches Tags
Labels
Clear labels
beta
breaking change
complexity: high
complexity: low
complexity: medium
needs milestone
netbox
pending closure
plugin candidate
pull-request
Mirrored from GitHub Pull Request
 severity: high
severity: low
severity: medium
status: accepted
status: backlog
status: blocked
status: duplicate
status: needs owner
status: needs triage
status: revisions needed
status: under review
topic: GraphQL
topic: Internationalization
topic: OpenAPI
topic: UI/UX
topic: cabling
topic: event rules
topic: htmx navigation
topic: industrialization
topic: migrations
topic: plugins
topic: scripts
topic: templating
topic: testing
type: bug
type: deprecation
type: documentation
type: feature
type: housekeeping
type: translation
No Label netbox severity: low status: accepted type: bug
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
adam
No Assignees
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: starred/netbox#11779
Delete Branch "%!s()"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?