Bug#388929: closed by Julien BLACHE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (Re: Bug#388929: mcelog: [annoying_notes] Abuse of debconf note(s))

[Christian Perrier]

> From: Julien BLACHE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Bug#388929: mcelog: [annoying_notes] Abuse of debconf note(s)
> Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2006 09:09:29 +0200
> 
> Christian Perrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> > One or more template(s) has/have been identified in mcelog 
> > debconf templates and an automated analysis mentions that it/they is/are
> > displayed to users at low or medium priority.
> 
> It sure looks like you did not have a close look at the package.


As this was an automated search for such notes, with the help of
Thomas Huriaux, yes you're right, Julien. I could check 135 packages
one by one

Could you give more details about this so that further checks can
easily avoid pointing again to mcelog? Details would help Thomas
Huriaux to improve his scripts.







signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Bug#388929: closed by Julien BLACHE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (Re: Bug#388929: mcelog: [annoying_notes] Abuse of debconf note(s))

[Julien BLACHE]

Christian Perrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Hi,

> Could you give more details about this so that further checks can
> easily avoid pointing again to mcelog? Details would help Thomas
> Huriaux to improve his scripts.

I'm using the note to warn the admin when mcelog is not usable on the
machine. I don't really care whether the note is displayed or not,
because in the latter case the admin will get a mail, which is even
better.

I used to display the warning and mail root in the postinst, but
debconf is the right way to do it, as discussed previously (see
archived bugs for mcelog).

It is important to warn the admin in this case because either:
 - there is no hardware support for MCEs, and mcelog is useless
 - kernel support is lacking, or the device node is not there, so
   mcelog cannot work

And we both know that nobody reads the damn README :)

JB.

-- 
 Julien BLACHE - Debian & GNU/Linux Developer - <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
 
 Public key available on  - KeyID: F5D6 5169 
 GPG Fingerprint : 935A 79F1 C8B3 3521 FD62 7CC7 CD61 4FD7 F5D6 5169 


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Bug#388929: closed by Julien BLACHE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (Re: Bug#388929: mcelog: [annoying_notes] Abuse of debconf note(s))

[Christian Perrier]

Quoting Julien BLACHE ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> Christian Perrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> > Could you give more details about this so that further checks can
> > easily avoid pointing again to mcelog? Details would help Thomas
> > Huriaux to improve his scripts.
> 
> I'm using the note to warn the admin when mcelog is not usable on the
> machine. I don't really care whether the note is displayed or not,
> because in the latter case the admin will get a mail, which is even
> better.

Seems to be a good use case for the "error" template type, indeed, as
I try to explain in the bug report..:-)

Also check whether the note is indeed *really* mailed. IIRC, JOeyh
Hess mentioend in the small thread we had on -devel that such feature
is no more enabled in debconf (or maybe only for "critical" priority
questions).





signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Bug#388929: closed by Julien BLACHE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (Re: Bug#388929: mcelog: [annoying_notes] Abuse of debconf note(s))

[Thomas Huriaux]

reopen 388929
retitle 388929 mcelog: Debconf note -- Please use the error type
thanks

Hi,

Julien BLACHE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (23/09/2006):
> Christian Perrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Could you give more details about this so that further checks can
> > easily avoid pointing again to mcelog? Details would help Thomas
> > Huriaux to improve his scripts.
> 
> I'm using the note to warn the admin when mcelog is not usable on the
> machine. I don't really care whether the note is displayed or not,
> because in the latter case the admin will get a mail, which is even
> better.
> 
> I used to display the warning and mail root in the postinst, but
> debconf is the right way to do it, as discussed previously (see
> archived bugs for mcelog).
> 
> It is important to warn the admin in this case because either:
>  - there is no hardware support for MCEs, and mcelog is useless
>  - kernel support is lacking, or the device node is not there, so
>mcelog cannot work

The following code:
|  # run mcelog --debian-test (Debian extension) to check whether
|  # /dev/mcelog is usable
|  MCEMSG=$(/usr/sbin/mcelog --debian-test)
|  if [ "$?" != 0 ]; then
|[...]
|db_input medium mcelog/unusable || true

really seems to fit the criterions of an "error" template, as suggested
by Christian.

Cheers,

-- 
Thomas Huriaux


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Bug#388929: closed by Julien BLACHE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (Re: Bug#388929: mcelog: [annoying_notes] Abuse of debconf note(s))

[Julien BLACHE]

Christian Perrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Seems to be a good use case for the "error" template type, indeed, as
> I try to explain in the bug report..:-)

Well I'll have a look, then.

> Also check whether the note is indeed *really* mailed. IIRC, JOeyh
> Hess mentioend in the small thread we had on -devel that such feature
> is no more enabled in debconf (or maybe only for "critical" priority
> questions).

Oh, crap.

JB.

-- 
 Julien BLACHE - Debian & GNU/Linux Developer - <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
 
 Public key available on  - KeyID: F5D6 5169 
 GPG Fingerprint : 935A 79F1 C8B3 3521 FD62 7CC7 CD61 4FD7 F5D6 5169 


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]