Your message dated Thu, 23 Jul 2015 22:14:32 +1000
with message-id <[email protected]>
and subject line Re: Bug#793178: Request backport of 688731 to Wheezy
has caused the Debian Bug report #793178,
regarding Request backport of 688731 to Wheezy
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [email protected]
immediately.)
--
793178: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=793178
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: procps
Version: 1:3.3.3-2
Severity: normal
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=688731 is causing
numerous issues downstream. Request that 688731 be backported and made
available in Wheezy.
If this is not possible/feasible, please provide a .deb package for
procps 3.3.4 that is Wheezy compatible.
Many thanks.
Tristan
Tristan Stevens
Solutions Architect
Cloudera, Inc. |www.cloudera.com <http://www.cloudera.com/>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Package: procps
Version: 1:3.3.4-1
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 07:37:20AM +0100, Tristan Stevens wrote:
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=688731 is causing
> numerous issues downstream. Request that 688731 be backported and made
> available in Wheezy.
If the issue is happening in downstream, why doesn't downstream just
make a downstream-specific port? I've attached the relevant patch from
upstream.
- Craig
--
Craig Small (@smallsees) http://enc.com.au/ csmall at : enc.com.au
Debian GNU/Linux http://www.debian.org/ csmall at : debian.org
GPG fingerprint: 5D2F B320 B825 D939 04D2 0519 3938 F96B DF50 FEA5
>From 19b6f48990b02aeca211b480625b95b2033c1017 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Craig Small <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 21:56:38 +1000
Subject: [PATCH] kill -PID fixed
Bug-Debian: http://bugs.debian.org/688731
kill would not permit negative PIDs and thought they were options. kill
now explicitly checks for unknown options and if they are numeric
assumes they are negative PIDs. The first negative PID stops any
further option processing.
Signed-off-by: Craig Small <[email protected]>
---
skill.c | 11 ++++++++++-
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/skill.c b/skill.c
index 94bf9c9..a1f89e0 100644
--- a/skill.c
+++ b/skill.c
@@ -363,6 +363,7 @@ static void __attribute__ ((__noreturn__))
{
int signo, i;
int sigopt = 0;
+ int loop = 1;
long pid;
int exitvalue = EXIT_SUCCESS;
@@ -389,7 +390,8 @@ static void __attribute__ ((__noreturn__))
else
sigopt++;
- while ((i = getopt_long(argc, argv, "l::Ls:hV", longopts, NULL)) != -1)
+ opterr=0; /* suppress errors on -123 */
+ while (loop == 1 && (i = getopt_long(argc, argv, "l::Ls:hV", longopts, NULL)) != -1)
switch (i) {
case 'l':
if (optarg) {
@@ -416,6 +418,13 @@ static void __attribute__ ((__noreturn__))
case 'V':
display_kill_version();
exit(EXIT_SUCCESS);
+ case '?':
+ if (!isdigit(optopt)) {
+ xwarnx(_("invalid argument %c"), optopt);
+ kill_usage(stderr);
+ }
+ loop=0;
+ break;
default:
kill_usage(stderr);
}
--
2.1.4
--- End Message ---
