Bug#887228: puppet-module-swift should depend on e2fsprogs explicitly
On Sun, Jan 14, 2018 at 08:09:16PM +0100, Helmut Grohne wrote: > Package: puppet-module-swift [...] > /usr/share/puppet/modules.available/swift/manifests/storage/ext4.pp contains > mkfs.ext4. According to file it is a ASCII text [...] https://sources.debian.org/src/puppet-module-swift/9.4.4-1/manifests/storage/ext4.pp/#L36 The above looks like using the mkfs.ext4 command is a crutial part of the functionality provided by this file. I can't find anything else in the source that points to this file actually being used anywhere. As a comparison there's also a xfs.pp in the same directory, but the package does not declare any relationship against xfsprogs. I have no puppet knowledge so it's very hard for me to tell what the correct solution is. Judging from the first part above I'd probably lean towards "better safe then sorry -> add e2fsprogs dep", but given the xfs comparison I'm torn Would be great to hear the maintainers view on this! Regards, Andreas Henriksson
Bug#887228: puppet-module-swift should depend on e2fsprogs explicitly
On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 07:03:35PM +0100, Andreas Henriksson wrote: > On Sun, Jan 14, 2018 at 08:09:16PM +0100, Helmut Grohne wrote: > > Package: puppet-module-swift > [...] > > /usr/share/puppet/modules.available/swift/manifests/storage/ext4.pp > > contains mkfs.ext4. According to file it is a ASCII text > [...] > > https://sources.debian.org/src/puppet-module-swift/9.4.4-1/manifests/storage/ext4.pp/#L36 > > The above looks like using the mkfs.ext4 command is a crutial part of > the functionality provided by this file. > > I can't find anything else in the source that points to this file > actually being used anywhere. This one is indeed tricky. I concur that it does need a dependency, but as with chef/ansible/... this code is not run on the machine it is installed on, so we don't need a Debian dependency here, but a puppet dependency that ensures that e2fsprogs is installed on the managed system! If I understand the module correctly, it installes the swift binary package before proceeding to use mkfs.ext4. Thus adding e2fsprogs to the swift binary package as a Debian dependency might do. Certainly though, added a dependency to puppet-module-swift is not going to help in any way here. Helmut
Bug#887228: [PKG-Openstack-devel] Bug#887228: puppet-module-swift should depend on e2fsprogs explicitly
On 02/24/2018 01:47 PM, Helmut Grohne wrote: > On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 07:03:35PM +0100, Andreas Henriksson wrote: >> On Sun, Jan 14, 2018 at 08:09:16PM +0100, Helmut Grohne wrote: >>> Package: puppet-module-swift >> [...] >>> /usr/share/puppet/modules.available/swift/manifests/storage/ext4.pp >>> contains mkfs.ext4. According to file it is a ASCII text >> [...] >> >> https://sources.debian.org/src/puppet-module-swift/9.4.4-1/manifests/storage/ext4.pp/#L36 >> >> The above looks like using the mkfs.ext4 command is a crutial part of >> the functionality provided by this file. >> >> I can't find anything else in the source that points to this file >> actually being used anywhere. > > This one is indeed tricky. I concur that it does need a dependency, but > as with chef/ansible/... this code is not run on the machine it is > installed on, so we don't need a Debian dependency here, but a puppet > dependency that ensures that e2fsprogs is installed on the managed > system! > > If I understand the module correctly, it installes the swift binary > package before proceeding to use mkfs.ext4. Thus adding e2fsprogs to the > swift binary package as a Debian dependency might do. > > Certainly though, added a dependency to puppet-module-swift is not going > to help in any way here. > > Helmut Helmut, I agree with your analysis, and I also think it's not a good idea to add a dependency on e2fsprogs in Swift, as a lot of people use it with XFS. Cheers, Thomas Goirand (zigo)
