Bug#573551: affects squeeze, package has only been updated in testing
I seem to be hitting this bug with the latest Puppet package (2.6.6-1~bpo60+1)
from backports in squeeze.
service{'puppet': enable = false} throws:
err: /Stage[main]/Puppet/Service[puppet]/enable: change from true to false
failed: Execution of '/usr/sbin/update-rc.d puppet disable' returned 1:
update-rc.d: error: no runlevel symlinks to modify, aborting!
and
/usr/sbin/update-rc.d puppet disable
update-rc.d: using dependency based boot sequencing
update-rc.d: error: no runlevel symlinks to modify, aborting!
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#573551: affects squeeze, package has only been updated in testing
On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 03:36:47 +0200, Faidon Liambotis parav...@debian.org wrote: On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 09:26:41PM -0400, micah anderson wrote: The proposed fix is similar to what you and Faidon have suggested, along with some tests. Unless someone screams really soon, this is going to be the upstream change, so take a second and have a look: https://github.com/MaxMartin/puppet/commit/be5c00cc9687e73dad15455f8429f0c2ab5667e5 That patch seems to only fix disable, no? Yes, that is correct. The enable case was not changed, because the way that puppet is enabling a service with the new update-rc.d seems to work fine. It seems like its only the disable case that is no longer working. Is that wrong, it could be! So if you know otherwise, please do tell me how. micah pgpOtckzO2dax.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#573551: affects squeeze, package has only been updated in testing
On Tue, 22 Mar 2011 07:39:40 +0100, martin f krafft madd...@debian.org wrote: also sprach micah anderson mi...@riseup.net [2011.03.22.0047 +0100]: So, removing the update_rc -f, @resource[:name], remove line before enable should be fine. This does seem like it might work, although I'm concerned about the corner cases, and: However, I'm not sure how that would interact with systems upgraded from lenny. I'll check that and get back to you, hopefully soon. this as well. Please do get back as soon as you test this. For the case that the links were previously removed, why not call update-rc.d with 'defaults' before enable. This will not do anything if the links exist, but it will install default links if they do not exist. The proposed fix is similar to what you and Faidon have suggested, along with some tests. Unless someone screams really soon, this is going to be the upstream change, so take a second and have a look: https://github.com/MaxMartin/puppet/commit/be5c00cc9687e73dad15455f8429f0c2ab5667e5 micah pgpUn7HZRpJtK.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#573551: affects squeeze, package has only been updated in testing
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 09:26:41PM -0400, micah anderson wrote: The proposed fix is similar to what you and Faidon have suggested, along with some tests. Unless someone screams really soon, this is going to be the upstream change, so take a second and have a look: https://github.com/MaxMartin/puppet/commit/be5c00cc9687e73dad15455f8429f0c2ab5667e5 That patch seems to only fix disable, no? Regards, Faidon -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#573551: affects squeeze, package has only been updated in testing
also sprach micah anderson mi...@riseup.net [2011.03.22.0047 +0100]: So, removing the update_rc -f, @resource[:name], remove line before enable should be fine. This does seem like it might work, although I'm concerned about the corner cases, and: However, I'm not sure how that would interact with systems upgraded from lenny. I'll check that and get back to you, hopefully soon. this as well. Please do get back as soon as you test this. For the case that the links were previously removed, why not call update-rc.d with 'defaults' before enable. This will not do anything if the links exist, but it will install default links if they do not exist. -- .''`. martin f. krafft madduck@d.o Related projects: : :' : proud Debian developer http://debiansystem.info `. `'` http://people.debian.org/~madduckhttp://vcs-pkg.org `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems gott ist tot! und wir haben ihn getötet. - friedrich nietzsche digital_signature_gpg.asc Description: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/sig-policy/999bbcc4/current)
Bug#573551: affects squeeze, package has only been updated in testing
Hi micah,
Sorry for the very late reply.
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 04:53:57PM -0500, micah anderson wrote:
# update-rc.d -f ssh remove
update-rc.d: using dependency based boot sequencing
# echo $?
0
# update-rc.d ssh disable
update-rc.d: using dependency based boot sequencing
update-rc.d: error: no runlevel symlinks to modify, aborting!
# echo $?
1
# invoke-rc.d --query ssh start
105
(note 105 is behavior uncertain)
Indeed, you are absolutely right, I confirm the above.
With my very limited, only on dependency-based booting-enabled, systems,
it seems that
update-rc.d $foo enable
counteracts
update-rc.d $foo disable
properly, as long as you don't call remove at any point.
So, removing the
update_rc -f, @resource[:name], remove
line before enable should be fine.
However, I'm not sure how that would interact with systems upgraded from
lenny. I'll check that and get back to you, hopefully soon.
So... I'm a little puzzled about what the right way to do this is. Is
using insserv directly the right way to do this? Can we count on insserv
being available on all squeeze systems, and dependency-based initscripts
enabled? What if they are not?
I'm not sure about that. Doesn't seem right in any way.
FWIW, there's a related discussion at debian-devel these days, see
20110304113539.ga10...@upsilon.cc.
This would also make backporting to lenny a problem because update-rc.d
foo {en,dis}able' would not work right, but this is less of a concern.
I guess you can document that and change that back, for the limited time
that lenny would still live.
Regards,
Faidon
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#573551: affects squeeze, package has only been updated in testing
On Mon, 21 Mar 2011 17:02:41 +0200, Faidon Liambotis parav...@debian.org
wrote:
Sorry for the very late reply.
No problem. It looks like we missed this stable point release, but we
can get the next one!
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 04:53:57PM -0500, micah anderson wrote:
...
(note 105 is behavior uncertain)
Indeed, you are absolutely right, I confirm the above.
Ok, good, I'm glad I'm not insane... or am I?
With my very limited, only on dependency-based booting-enabled, systems,
it seems that
update-rc.d $foo enable
counteracts
update-rc.d $foo disable
properly, as long as you don't call remove at any point.
So, removing the
update_rc -f, @resource[:name], remove
line before enable should be fine.
This does seem like it might work, although I'm concerned about the
corner cases, and:
However, I'm not sure how that would interact with systems upgraded from
lenny. I'll check that and get back to you, hopefully soon.
this as well. Please do get back as soon as you test this.
FWIW, there's a related discussion at debian-devel these days, see
20110304113539.ga10...@upsilon.cc.
Thanks, I'll have a read.
This would also make backporting to lenny a problem because update-rc.d
foo {en,dis}able' would not work right, but this is less of a concern.
I guess you can document that and change that back, for the limited time
that lenny would still live.
True, thats not difficult.
micah
pgpu4LrvgTJQU.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Bug#573551: affects squeeze, package has only been updated in testing
On Sat, 5 Mar 2011 01:40:15 +0200, Faidon Liambotis parav...@debian.org wrote:
On Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 12:31:07PM -0500, micah anderson wrote:
On Wed, 02 Mar 2011 11:28:46 -0500, micah anderson mi...@riseup.net wrote:
What can we do to have this backported in squeeze as well? Can I do
anything to help? I can NMU but I maybe you prefer handling this as a
maintainer upload, no?
I sent the request to debian-release to have this put in as a stable
point release update, but I'm afraid that I am now unsure that it is a
proper fix. One way to help would be to help me sort this out.
The enable portion of the diff looks like this:
@@ -43,6 +43,6 @@ Puppet::Type.type(:service).provide :debian, :parent = :init
do
def enable
update_rc -f, @resource[:name], remove
-update_rc @resource[:name], defaults
+update_rc @resource[:name], enable
end
end
This seems to throw errors if no symlinks exist for the service. Perhaps
this is fine if all that is ever being done is to re-enable a previously
disabled service, is that true?
However, it is called right after an 'update-rc.d remove' which seems
like it would break, for example:
First we make sure that a service is properly enabled:
# invoke-rc.d --query ssh start
# echo $?
104
(according to invoke-rc.d 104 means that its properly enabled)
so lets disable it using the mechanism that puppet would use with this
patch to disable it, and then once its disabled, we will enable it again
and see the problem:
# update-rc.d -f ssh remove
update-rc.d: using dependency based boot sequencing
# echo $?
0
# update-rc.d ssh disable
update-rc.d: using dependency based boot sequencing
update-rc.d: error: no runlevel symlinks to modify, aborting!
# echo $?
1
# invoke-rc.d --query ssh start
105
(note 105 is behavior uncertain)
So that would be the state it is in when we do an enable, now lets do
the enable that puppet would do:
# update-rc.d -f ssh remove
update-rc.d: using dependency based boot sequencing
# echo $?
0
# update-rc.d ssh enable
update-rc.d: using dependency based boot sequencing
update-rc.d: error: no runlevel symlinks to modify, aborting!
# echo $?
1
# invoke-rc.d --query ssh start
# echo $?
105
And again, we are in an unknown state.
So... I'm a little puzzled about what the right way to do this is. Is
using insserv directly the right way to do this? Can we count on insserv
being available on all squeeze systems, and dependency-based initscripts
enabled? What if they are not?
This would also make backporting to lenny a problem because update-rc.d
foo {en,dis}able' would not work right, but this is less of a concern.
micah
pgpnXeV1NUKWv.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Bug#573551: affects squeeze, package has only been updated in testing
On Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 12:31:07PM -0500, micah anderson wrote: On Wed, 02 Mar 2011 11:28:46 -0500, micah anderson mi...@riseup.net wrote: Additionally, I think that we can push 2.6.4-1 into backports now. I uploaded a backport of 2.6.4-1 yesterday, pending NEW approval from backports. Thanks. Although personally I'd prefer sticking to just squeeze 'till a major upgrade. What can we do to have this backported in squeeze as well? Can I do anything to help? I can NMU but I maybe you prefer handling this as a maintainer upload, no? Best regards, Faidon -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#573551: affects squeeze, package has only been updated in testing
On Sat, 5 Mar 2011 01:40:15 +0200, Faidon Liambotis parav...@debian.org wrote: On Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 12:31:07PM -0500, micah anderson wrote: On Wed, 02 Mar 2011 11:28:46 -0500, micah anderson mi...@riseup.net wrote: Additionally, I think that we can push 2.6.4-1 into backports now. I uploaded a backport of 2.6.4-1 yesterday, pending NEW approval from backports. Thanks. Although personally I'd prefer sticking to just squeeze 'till a major upgrade. What can we do to have this backported in squeeze as well? Can I do anything to help? I can NMU but I maybe you prefer handling this as a maintainer upload, no? I'm just waiting for confirmation from the rest of the team that there are no other issues to put into a stable point release. Once I have that, I'll upload. micah pgpA42fREhXpN.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#573551: affects squeeze, package has only been updated in testing
On Wed, 02 Mar 2011 11:28:46 -0500, micah anderson mi...@riseup.net wrote: Additionally, I think that we can push 2.6.4-1 into backports now. I uploaded a backport of 2.6.4-1 yesterday, pending NEW approval from backports. micah pgpgLqmS3sZZC.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#573551: affects squeeze, package has only been updated in testing
On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 02:29:30PM +1100, Tim Connors wrote:
The fix in 2.6.4-1 in testing is all well and good, but the bug applies to
stable. Stable has the removed update-rc.d stop feature, and so in
stable, I can't actually convince puppet to ensure the service is stopped.
I also got bitten by this.
Apparently this case is summarized to this:
* changes in update-rc.d to accommodate for dependency-based booting
broke puppet's functionality to enable/disable services, i.e. rules
like:
service {postgresql: enable = false }
* this was reported in this bug and fixed with puppet 2.6.4-1
* squeeze includes the new update-rc.d but has puppet 2.6.2-4
* = a default squeeze installation does not work wrt this feature
(a regression from lenny)
The patch is trivial (2 lines). It'd be nice if it could be applied to
2.6.2-4 and incorporated into a stable point release.
I already contacted Martin on IRC and he said he's too busy to work on
it.
Can someone from the rest of puppet maintainers have a look? It should
be really easy.
Regards,
Faidon
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#573551: affects squeeze, package has only been updated in testing
On Wed, 2 Mar 2011 15:38:10 +0200, Faidon Liambotis parav...@debian.org wrote: On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 02:29:30PM +1100, Tim Connors wrote: The fix in 2.6.4-1 in testing is all well and good, but the bug applies to stable. Stable has the removed update-rc.d stop feature, and so in stable, I can't actually convince puppet to ensure the service is stopped. I also got bitten by this. Yesterday, I spent a couple hours because of this. I could have sworn we fixed it in the package, but you are right, it was only fixed in 2.6.4-1, and not the version that is in stable. The patch is trivial (2 lines). It'd be nice if it could be applied to 2.6.2-4 and incorporated into a stable point release. I agree, I also would like to see this. I'm not aware of how point releases work for this round, but I'm happy to help make that happen. Additionally, I think that we can push 2.6.4-1 into backports now. Micah pgpxLsIeenoUw.pgp Description: PGP signature
