Bug#282042: apache-common/logs incorrectly complains about logging to pipes

[Allard Hoeve]

Package: apache-common
Version: 1.3.33-2.1
Severity: wishlist
Tags: patch

Dear Maintainers,

In our apache setup, we log to a program. This program transports messages to a 
logserver, which than processes the 
logentries. This is working fine.

While upgrading apache, the postinst scripts prompt me with a message that 
apache has switched to logrotate and logfiles
should be situated in /var/log and nowhere else. While this could potentially 
be a very useful message, all my logfiles are
in /var/log/, except for my pipe ofcourse. While investigating the situation, I 
wrote up this quick patch to make
postinst.common not croak when encountering pipes. This should confuse fewer 
users.

Please apply.

Regards,

Allard


-- System Information:
Debian Release: 3.1
  APT prefers testing
  APT policy: (500, 'testing')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Kernel: Linux 2.6.8.1-byte
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C

Versions of packages apache-common depends on:
ii  apache-utils   1.3.33-2.1Utility programs for webservers
ii  debconf1.4.30.10 Debian configuration management sy
ii  elinks [www-browser]   0.9.1+0.9.2pre4-1 Character mode WWW/FTP browser
ii  libc6  2.3.2.ds1-18  GNU C Library: Shared libraries an
ii  libdb4.2   4.2.52-17 Berkeley v4.2 Database Libraries [
ii  libexpat1  1.95.8-1  XML parsing C library - runtime li
ii  lynx [www-browser] 2.8.5-2   Text-mode WWW Browser
ii  mime-support   3.28-1MIME files 'mime.types'  'mailcap
ii  perl   5.8.4-3   Larry Wall's Practical Extraction 
ii  sed4.1.2-1   The GNU sed stream editor
ii  ucf1.13  Update Configuration File: preserv

-- debconf information:
  apache-common/confignotes:
  apache-common/old-logrotate-exists:
* apache-common/logs:
  apache-shared/debconf-modules: mod_userdir, mod_status, mod_ssl, 
mod_setenvif, mod_rewrite, mod_negotiation, mod_mime_magic, mod_mime, 
mod_log_config, mod_include, mod_env, mod_dir, mod_cgi, mod_autoindex, 
mod_auth, mod_alias, mod_actions, mod_access, mod_php4
  apache-shared/restart: false
Index: listlogfiles
===
--- listlogfiles(revision 102)
+++ listlogfiles(working copy)
@@ -42,7 +42,7 @@
 # take away surrounding ' and 
 $file =~ s/[\\']//g;
  
-if ($file !~ m|^/var/log/| ) {
+if ($file !~ m!^(?:/var/log/|\|)! ) {
 #  $errorcondition++; # uncomment this if you prefer count of errors
   $errorcondition = 1;
   print Wrong log file definition in $conf: $_ if $printerrorfile;

Question about maintaining the unofficial/parallel apache-lingerd package.

[Alexis Sukrieh]

Hello there.

I'm maintaining an unofficial package, apache-lingerd [1].
It's a new flavour of the official Debian apache source tree.

As it won't be included in Debian, and as some users requested me
to maintain the package against the last sid packages, I'm a little bit
confused :

- If I make a package in my personal repository with a version number
  higher than the official package, users can get confused with apt-get
  upgrade (would upgrade to my apache package even if they don't want my
  lingerd package).

- If I use the same version number, it won't work.
  Indeed, as every flavour, apache-lingerd depends on apache-common
  which provides /usr/sbin/apache-modconf. 
  The official apache-modconf does not support apache-lingerd but 
  my version does.

What would be, to you, the best way of numbering an unofficial package
which is already existing, with the same name in Debian ?

That's a really special case I guess and I haven't found yet a good
solution.

Any help/comment/idea is welcome.

Other advices about maintaining a patched debian package is also
welcome.

Regards,

Alexis.

1 : http://www.sukria.net/packages/apache-lingerd/

-- 
Alexis Sukrieh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
* Another Linux Debian Geek Enthusiast
* http://www.sukria.net
* http://www.debian.org - Just for code.

Bug#280206: apache: Apache wont start, FD_SETSIZE set too low in 1.3.31-7?

[Fabio Massimo Di Nitto]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Peter Bredlöv wrote:
| Ok, I understand.
|
| A little googling shows that many people have tried adding CFLAGS, but in 
lots of cases they
werent being used. I guess they didn't add them in the right spot, or something 
else over-wrote the
change.
|
| Could you please check again to make sure it went in?
|
| Regards,
| Peter
Please Peter keep the bug address in CC and also please give me the time to
look at it. Asking me updates on the problem doesn't help either.
Thanks
Fabio
- --
Self-Service law:
The last available dish of the food you have decided to eat, will be
inevitably taken from the person in front of you.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFBnjGrhCzbekR3nhgRAt+zAJ4mLRQEwxXvShsanEnXo+SMkHlHoQCeK5tf
OOdGu+cLPPW0Yos9bx2MvQs=
=KlOu
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

HPアクセスアップのお知らせ

[girls]

$BGR7M$N$3$H$H$*7D$S?=$7>e$2$^$9!#(B
$B7HBS%i%s%-%s%0%5%$%H1?1D$7$F$*$j$^$9!Z(BADMAX$B![$H?=$7$^$9!#(B
(B
$BFMA3$N$*JX$j$G<:NiCW$7$^$9!#(B
(B
$B$*$+$2$5$^$G=gD4$K%"%/%;%9?t$,?-$S$F;2$j$^$7$?!#(B
$BH<$$$^$7$F!"?75,%i%s%-%s%0%5%$%H$r9=C[$7$^$7$?!#(B
(B
$B$3$NEY$O!"%i%s%-%s%0%5%$%H$X$N$4EPO?$N0FFb$H$7$^$7$F!"$4O"Mm$r$5$;$F$$$?(B
(B[EMAIL PROTECTED](B
$B@'Hs0lEY$4MwD:$-$^$7$F$h$m$7$1$l$P$4EPO?2<$5$$!#(B
(B
$B$3$NEY$N%i%s%-%s%0%5%$%H$NFCD'(B
$B"##3#0J,Kh$G$N99?7(B
$B"[EMAIL PROTECTED]<%6!/$J$$$J$,$i$b!"<+/$7$G$b%"%/%;%9%"%C%W$G$-$^$9$h$&=<e$2$^$9!#(B
(B
(B
(B_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
$B!Z(BADMAX$B![(B
(BE-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(B_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
(B
(B
$BG[?.$K$O==J,Cm0U$7$F$*$j$^$9$,!"B?=EG[?.!"$4ITMW$NJ}!"(B
$B4{$KEPO?$7$FD:$$$?%5%$%H4IM}l9g$*OM$S?=$7>e$2$^$9!#(B