look like I got it to work from 4.7.1 was probably my environment that was broken... thanks,
On Sat, Aug 6, 2016 at 11:23 AM, Pierre-Luc Dion <pdion...@apache.org> wrote: > I will retry an upgrade from 4.7.1 will see how it goes... a fresh > install of 4.9.0 work fine. > > > On Sat, Aug 6, 2016 at 4:29 AM, Rohit Yadav <rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com> > wrote: > >> Pierre - the role_id column is added in the upgrade path (java class and >> not in sql file): >> >> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/commit/4347776ac6ef9ae8 >> 6fb016862f4a6b2376f8319a#diff-c93d874f0a029693b9d0baf34555f277R96 >> >> >> I don't know how rpms were generated at apt-get.eu, you may try the >> packages I built here: >> >> http://packages.shapeblue.com/cloudstack/upstream >> >> >> It looks like the 481 to 490 cleanup sql file did not run which recreates >> the host_view: >> >> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/blob/4.9.0/setup/db/db/ >> schema-481to490-cleanup.sql#L276 >> >> >> I've upgraded a local installation which worked without any issues. I >> also deployed database with a fresh install and it worked as well. >> >> Can you share details/steps on how to reproduce your issues? Or, can you >> try with a fresh install or a new upgrade test? >> >> >> Regards. >> >> ________________________________ >> From: Pierre-Luc Dion <pdion...@apache.org> >> Sent: 06 August 2016 07:33:40 >> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org >> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.9.0 RC2 >> >> I'm working on the release note, so I've installed rpm's from apt-get.eu; >> the managemnt server was not able to start because of a missing column >> (account.role_id), I'm not seing an alter tables for this column >> in setup/db/db/schema-481to490.sql but the creation of the table role is >> there. >> >> I did a quick fix but I doubt it's the right change: >> >> ALTER TABLE account ADD COLUMN role_id bigint(20); >> >> then I got the management-server to work but now I have a lot of errors >> related to views tables: >> >> DB Exception on: com.mysql.jdbc.JDBC4PreparedStatement@208fa188: SELECT >> account_view.id, account_view.uuid, account_view.account_name, >> account_view.type, account_view.role_id, account_view.state, >> account_view.removed, account_view.cleanup_needed, >> account_view.network_domain, account_view.domain_id, >> account_view.domain_uuid, account_view.domain_name, >> account_view.domain_path, account_view.data_center_id, >> account_view.data_center_uuid, account_view.data_center_name, >> account_view.bytesReceived, account_view.bytesSent, account_view.vmLimit, >> account_view.vmTotal, account_view.ipLimit, account_view.ipTotal, >> account_view.ipFree, account_view.volumeLimit, account_view.volumeTotal, >> account_view.snapshotLimit, account_view.snapshotTotal, >> account_view.templateLimit, account_view.templateTotal, >> account_view.stoppedVms, account_view.runningVms, >> account_view.projectLimit, account_view.projectTotal, >> account_view.networkLimit, account_view.networkTotal, >> account_view.vpcLimit, account_view.vpcTotal, account_view.cpuLimit, >> account_view.cpuTotal, account_view.memoryLimit, account_view.memoryTotal, >> account_view.primaryStorageLimit, account_view.primaryStorageTotal, >> account_view.secondaryStorageLimit, account_view.secondaryStorageTotal, >> account_view.job_id, account_view.job_uuid, account_view.job_status, >> account_view.default FROM account_view WHERE account_view.id = 4 >> >> ERROR 1054 (42S22): Unknown column 'host_view.oobm_enabled' in 'field >> list' >> >> >> Did anyone got this too after an upgrade? I'll do more test, but to me >> that is a blocker :-S >> >> Thanks, >> >> >> rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com >> www.shapeblue.com >> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK >> @shapeblue >> >> >> >> On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 7:47 AM, Will Stevens <wstev...@cloudops.com> >> wrote: >> >> > Still working through getting the release notes written. Hopefully will >> > have them finished in the next day or two. >> > >> > *Will STEVENS* >> > Lead Developer >> > >> > *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts >> > 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6 >> > w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_ >> > >> > On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 1:39 AM, ilya <ilya.mailing.li...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > >> > > Hi Will and Team >> > > >> > > Can someone point me to upgrade instructions if such exist. >> > > >> > > Would like to avoid learning through trial and error if possible. >> > > >> > > I will be testing upgrade and functionality of KVM & VMware Advanced >> > > Shared Zones from ACS4.5.2 to latest. >> > > >> > > Thanks >> > > ilya >> > > >> > > On 7/29/16 11:06 AM, ilya wrote: >> > > > Hi Will >> > > > >> > > > What Remi mentioned sounds reasonable.. >> > > > >> > > > I'll be spending sometime today and next week to test out the issue >> > > > reported in 4.8 with VR not starting in Basic Zone - as well latest >> > 4.9.. >> > > > >> > > > i know i'm late to the party - but this is the best i could do :( >> > > > >> > > > Regards, >> > > > ilya >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > On 7/29/16 9:19 AM, Will Stevens wrote: >> > > >> I think everything is up to date and correct now. Please let me >> know >> > if >> > > >> anything seems out of place (this is the first time I have done >> this). >> > > >> >> > > >> I will wait to do an official announcement until Monday in case >> > anything >> > > >> comes up. I will also wait to update the following things until >> > Monday: >> > > >> http://cloudstack.apache.org/downloads.html and the release notes >> > > (cause I >> > > >> have to finish them). >> > > >> >> > > >> Let me know if you have questions. >> > > >> >> > > >> Should I be cutting a 4.8.1 release as well? Not sure how that >> works. >> > > >> Remi said to do the 4.9.0 release first and then take care of the >> > 4.8.1 >> > > >> release after. Ideas? >> > > >> >> > > >> *Will STEVENS* >> > > >> Lead Developer >> > > >> >> > > >> *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts >> > > >> 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6 >> > > >> w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_ >> > > >> >> > > >> On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 12:13 PM, Will Stevens < >> wstev...@cloudops.com >> > > >> > > >> wrote: >> > > >> >> > > >>> Yep, in the process of getting the release cut. Got side tracked >> by >> > > >>> people a few times, but I am almost finished... I will keep you >> > > posted... >> > > >>> >> > > >>> *Will STEVENS* >> > > >>> Lead Developer >> > > >>> >> > > >>> *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts >> > > >>> 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6 >> > > >>> w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_ >> > > >>> >> > > >>> On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 12:10 PM, Rohit Yadav < >> > > rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com> >> > > >>> wrote: >> > > >>> >> > > >>>> Thank you Will. Please cut the 4.9 branch so it can be picked for >> > LTS >> > > >>>> release work. >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> I'll publish the rpm/deb packages in the sb hosted upstream repo >> > > shortly. >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> Regards. >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com >> > > >>>> www.shapeblue.com<http://www.shapeblue.com> >> > > >>>> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK >> > > >>>> @shapeblue >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 7:27 PM +0530, "Will Stevens" < >> > > >>>> wstev...@cloudops.com<mailto:wstev...@cloudops.com>> wrote: >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> Sorry, I did not follow the correct format. :P >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> After 72 hours, the vote for CloudStack 4.9.0 *passes* with 6 >> PMC + >> > 2 >> > > >>>> non-PMC votes. >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> +1 (PMC / binding) >> > > >>>> * Rohit Yadav >> > > >>>> * Mike Tutkowski >> > > >>>> * Wido den Hollander >> > > >>>> * Milamber >> > > >>>> * Nux! >> > > >>>> * John Burwell >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> +1 (non binding) >> > > >>>> * Paul Angus >> > > >>>> * Abhinandan Prateek >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> 0 >> > > >>>> none >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> -1 >> > > >>>> none >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> Thanks to everyone participating. >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> *Will STEVENS* >> > > >>>> Lead Developer >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts >> > > >>>> 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6 >> > > >>>> w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_ >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 9:44 AM, Will Stevens < >> > wstev...@cloudops.com> >> > > >>>> wrote: >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>>> The vote is closed. The RC passed with the following votes. >> > > >>>>> >> > > >>>>> +1 : 8 (including 6 binding) >> > > >>>>> +0 : 0 >> > > >>>>> -1 : 0 >> > > >>>>> >> > > >>>>> Thanks everyone, I will get this pushed out today... >> > > >>>>> >> > > >>>>> *Will STEVENS* >> > > >>>>> Lead Developer >> > > >>>>> >> > > >>>>> *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts >> > > >>>>> 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6 >> > > >>>>> w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_ >> > > >>>>> >> > > >>>>> On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 5:24 AM, Abhinandan Prateek < >> > > >>>>> abhinandan.prat...@shapeblue.com> wrote: >> > > >>>>> >> > > >>>>>> +1 >> > > >>>>>> >> > > >>>>>> Did manual testing with a cluster of Xen 6.5 in advanced zone. >> > > >>>>>> Vm life cycle >> > > >>>>>> VM Snapshot, volume snapshots >> > > >>>>>> Volume and Template from snapshots >> > > >>>>>> Migration >> > > >>>>>> Change Password >> > > >>>>>> Change service offering >> > > >>>>>> VPC, multiple tiers, VMs, ACLs >> > > >>>>>> >> > > >>>>>> Regards, >> > > >>>>>> -abhi >> > > >>>>>> >> > > >>>>>> >> > > >>>>>> >> > > >>>>>> >> > > >>>>>> >> > > >>>>>> On 29/07/16, 1:43 AM, "John Burwell" < >> john.burw...@shapeblue.com> >> > > >>>> wrote: >> > > >>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>> All, >> > > >>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>> I vote +1 (binding). We have tested 4.9.0 RC2 in the >> following >> > > >>>>>> environments: >> > > >>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>> • CentOS 6.8 management server + CentOS 6.8 KVM Hosts >> using >> > > NFS >> > > >>>>>> primary and secondary storage (would allow us to verify/fix the >> > > >>>> documented >> > > >>>>>> libvirt/qemu versions) >> > > >>>>>>> • CentOS 6.8 management server + vCenter 5.5u3d + ESXi >> > 5.5u3b >> > > >>>>>> using NFS primary and secondary storage >> > > >>>>>>> • CentOS 6.8 management server + vCenter 6.0u2 + ESXi >> > Express >> > > >>>>>> Patch 6 using NFS primary and secondary storage >> > > >>>>>>> • CentOS 6.8 management server + XenServer 6.2 SP1 using >> > NFS >> > > >>>>>> primary and secondary storage >> > > >>>>>>> • CentOS 6.8 management server + XenServer 6.5 SP1 using >> > NFS >> > > >>>>>> primary and secondary storage >> > > >>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>> For each environment, we have run the following tests: >> > > >>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>> • All smoke tests >> > > >>>>>>> • test_accounts.py >> > > >>>>>>> • test_acl_*.py >> > > >>>>>>> • test_sharednetwork*.py >> > > >>>>>>> • test_add_remove_network.py >> > > >>>>>>> • test_advancedsg_networks.py >> > > >>>>>>> • test_affinity_groups*.py >> > > >>>>>>> • test_cpu_domain_limits.py >> > > >>>>>>> • test_cpu_limits.py >> > > >>>>>>> • test_cpu_max_limits.py >> > > >>>>>>> • test_host_maintenance.py >> > > >>>>>>> • test_memory_limits.py >> > > >>>>>>> • test_network_offering.py >> > > >>>>>>> • test_overcommit.py >> > > >>>>>>> • test_persistent_networks.py >> > > >>>>>>> • test_ps_domain_limits.py >> > > >>>>>>> • test_ps_limits.py >> > > >>>>>>> • test_ps_max_limits.py >> > > >>>>>>> • test_ps_resize_volume.py >> > > >>>>>>> • test_ps_resource_limits_volume.py >> > > >>>>>>> • test_resource_limits.py >> > > >>>>>>> • test_routers.py >> > > >>>>>>> • test_security_groups.py >> > > >>>>>>> • test_shared_networks.py >> > > >>>>>>> • test_snapshots.py >> > > >>>>>>> • test_ss_domain_limits.py >> > > >>>>>>> • test_ss_limits.py >> > > >>>>>>> • test_ss_max_limits.py >> > > >>>>>>> • test_templates.py >> > > >>>>>>> • test_update_vm.py >> > > >>>>>>> • test_volumes.py >> > > >>>>>>> • test_vpc.py >> > > >>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>> During our tests, we found the following issues, but do not >> see >> > > any of >> > > >>>>>> them as blockers: >> > > >>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>> • As Paul and Boris noted, the >> > > >>>>>> test_01_create_redundant_VPC_2tiers_4VMs_4IPs_4PF_ACL in >> > > >>>>>> test_vpc_redundant.py fails. We are uncertain as to whether >> this >> > > >>>> failure >> > > >>>>>> is caused by a defect, a problem with the test case, or our >> test >> > > >>>>>> environment. >> > > >>>>>>> • We have seen NPEs in the log every 10 minutes >> attempting >> > to >> > > >>>>>> garbage collect a non-existent XenServer volume previously >> > attached >> > > to >> > > >>>> a >> > > >>>>>> VR. While ugly, it is not leaving unused volumes to consume >> disk >> > > >>>> space. >> > > >>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>> Thanks, >> > > >>>>>>> -John >> > > >>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>> john.burw...@shapeblue.com >> > > >>>>>>> www.shapeblue.com<http://www.shapeblue.com> >> > > >>>>>>> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London VA WC2N 4HSUK >> > > >>>>>>> @shapeblue >> > > >>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>> On Jul 28, 2016, at 12:55 PM, Paul Angus < >> > paul.an...@shapeblue.com >> > > > >> > > >>>>>> wrote: >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>> I'm getting a pass on KVM for >> > > >>>>>> /marvin/test/integration/smoke/test_vpc_redundant.py >> > > >>>>>>>> And a FAIL on VMware for the same test, with the same error. >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>> 2016-07-28 04:00:52,133 - CRITICAL - FAILED: >> > > >>>>>> test_01_create_redundant_VPC_2tiers_4VMs_4IPs_4PF_ACL: >> ['Traceback >> > > >>>> (most >> > > >>>>>> recent call last):\n', ' File >> > > "/usr/lib64/python2.7/unittest/case.py", >> > > >>>>>> line 369, in run\n testMethod()\n', ' File >> > > >>>>>> "/marvin/test/integration/smoke/test_vpc_redundant.py", line >> 537, >> > in >> > > >>>>>> test_01_create_redundant_VPC_2tiers_4VMs_4IPs_4PF_ACL\n >> > > >>>>>> self.check_routers_state(1)\n', ' File >> > > >>>>>> "/marvin/test/integration/smoke/test_vpc_redundant.py", line >> 304, >> > in >> > > >>>>>> check_routers_state\n self.query_routers(count, >> showall)\n', ' >> > > File >> > > >>>>>> "/marvin/test/integration/smoke/test_vpc_redundant.py", line >> 297, >> > in >> > > >>>>>> query_routers\n "Check that %s routers were indeed created" >> % >> > > >>>> count)\n', >> > > >>>>>> ' File "/usr/lib64/python2.7/unittest/case.py", line 553, in >> > > >>>>>> assertEqual\n assertion_func(first, second, msg=msg)\n', ' >> > File >> > > >>>>>> "/usr/lib64/python2.7/unittest/case.py", line 546, in >> > > >>>> _baseAssertEqual\n >> > > >>>>>> raise self.failureException(msg)\n', 'AssertionError: Check >> that 1 >> > > >>>> routers >> > > >>>>>> were indeed created\n'] >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>> Kind regards, >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>> Paul Angus >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>> paul.an...@shapeblue.com >> > > >>>>>>>> www.shapeblue.com<http://www.shapeblue.com> >> > > >>>>>>>> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK >> > > >>>>>>>> @shapeblue >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >> > > >>>>>>>> From: williamstev...@gmail.com [mailto: >> williamstev...@gmail.com >> > ] >> > > On >> > > >>>>>> Behalf Of Will Stevens >> > > >>>>>>>> Sent: 28 July 2016 17:24 >> > > >>>>>>>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org >> > > >>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.9.0 RC2 >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>> The teardown issue looks to be environmental. Apparently the >> > > >>>> network >> > > >>>>>> did not get cleaned up before the network service offering >> using >> > it >> > > was >> > > >>>>>> attempted to be deleted. >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>> I am not sure about the test_vpc_redundent test failure. I >> run >> > > that >> > > >>>>>> test all the time on KVM and have not been getting that >> problem. >> > Do >> > > >>>> you >> > > >>>>>> get the same thing if you run it again in your environment? >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>> *Will STEVENS* >> > > >>>>>>>> Lead Developer >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>> *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts >> > > >>>>>>>> 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6 w >> cloudops.com >> > > *|* >> > > >>>> tw >> > > >>>>>> @CloudOps_ >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>> On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 12:00 PM, Boris Stoyanov < >> > > >>>>>> boris.stoya...@shapeblue.com> wrote: >> > > >>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>> Hi we’ve run: test_vpc_redundant and got : >> > > >>>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>> 2016-07-28 16:36:29,959 - CRITICAL - FAILED: >> > > >>>> test_05_rvpc_multi_tiers: >> > > >>>>>>>>> ['Traceback (most recent call last):\n', ' File >> > > >>>>>>>>> "/usr/lib64/python2.7/unittest/case.py", line 369, in run\n >> > > >>>>>>>>> testMethod()\n', ' File >> > > >>>>>>>>> "/marvin/test/integration/smoke/test_vpc_redundant.py", >> line >> > 620, >> > > >>>> in >> > > >>>>>>>>> test_05_rvpc_multi_tiers\n >> self.check_routers_state()\n', ' >> > > >>>> File >> > > >>>>>>>>> "/marvin/test/integration/smoke/test_vpc_redundant.py", >> line >> > 353, >> > > >>>> in >> > > >>>>>>>>> check_routers_state\n self.fail("Expected \'%s\' routers >> at >> > > >>>> state >> > > >>>>>>>>> \'%s\', but found \'%s\'!" % (expected_count, >> status_to_check, >> > > >>>>>>>>> cnts[vals.index(status_to_check)]))\n', ' File >> > > >>>>>>>>> "/usr/lib64/python2.7/unittest/case.py", line 450, in >> fail\n >> > > >>>> raise >> > > >>>>>>>>> self.failureException(msg)\n', "AssertionError: Expected '1' >> > > >>>> routers >> > > >>>>>>>>> at state 'MASTER', but found '0'!\n"] >> > > >>>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>> Deleting network offering while in use? >> > > >>>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>> 2016-07-28 16:38:41,560 - CRITICAL - EXCEPTION: >> > > >>>>>> test_05_rvpc_multi_tiers: >> > > >>>>>>>>> ['Traceback (most recent call last):\n', ' File >> > > >>>>>>>>> "/usr/lib64/python2.7/unittest/case.py", line 398, in run\n >> > > >>>>>>>>> self.tearDown()\n', ' File >> > > >>>>>>>>> "/marvin/test/integration/smoke/test_vpc_redundant.py", >> line >> > 281, >> > > >>>> in >> > > >>>>>>>>> tearDown\n raise Exception("Warning: Exception during >> > cleanup >> > > : >> > > >>>>>> %s" % >> > > >>>>>>>>> e)\n', "Exception: Warning: Exception during cleanup : >> Execute >> > > cmd: >> > > >>>>>>>>> deletenetworkoffering failed, due to: errorCode: 431, >> > > >>>> errorText:Can't >> > > >>>>>>>>> delete network offering 35 as its used by 1 networks. To >> make >> > the >> > > >>>>>>>>> network offering unavaiable, disable it\n"] >> > > >>>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>> Our setup is centos68 with xen6.2 hosts. >> > > >>>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>> boris.stoya...@shapeblue.com >> > > >>>>>>>>> www.shapeblue.com<http://www.shapeblue.com> >> > > >>>>>>>>> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK >> @shapeblue >> > > >>>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>> On Jul 27, 2016, at 6:20 PM, Haijiao <18602198...@163.com >> > > <mailto: >> > > >>>>>>>>> 18602198...@163.com>> wrote: >> > > >>>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>> Hi, Gents >> > > >>>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>> Anyone tested RC2 with redudant VR configuration ? I think >> > there >> > > >>>> are >> > > >>>>>> some >> > > >>>>>>>>> issues not fixed yet, e.g. password server. >> > > >>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9385 >> > > >>>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>> We will test these days and come back. >> > > >>>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>>> >> > > >>>>>> >> > > >>>>>> abhinandan.prat...@shapeblue.com >> > > >>>>>> www.shapeblue.com<http://www.shapeblue.com> >> > > >>>>>> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK >> > > >>>>>> @shapeblue >> > > >>>>>> >> > > >>>>>> >> > > >>>>>> >> > > >>>>>> >> > > >>>>> >> > > >>>> >> > > >>> >> > > >>> >> > > >> >> > > >> > >> > >
