Bug#677943: [Packaging] Bug#677943: release critical?
Hi intrigeri, thanks for keep pushing this! :-) On Dienstag, 20. November 2012, intrigeri wrote: Would it help to push this out with an NMU? If we go this way, I guess the best would be to build from Vcs-Git in order to include the fix for #687715 that's already there. While we're at it, any other important enough bugs that you really want to get fixed in Wheezy, that can be fixed in a minimal enough way to go with the RC bug fix through a freeze unblock (e.g. I'm thinking of #691390 and #691758) ? yeah, there is some more work left to do anyway, so just an NMU for #677943 wouldnt help much. And I'm positive to have the time to work on this during the upcoming mini- debconf in Paris this weekend, and to do an upload from there. If I still fail to do so, an NMU is more than welcome. cheers sorry for the delay... (it was partly due to me not having a clear idea what I think is best for munin in wheezy (2.0.6 is kinda crappy / has too many bugs still.. I now do have a plan for that... 2.0.6 plus lots of patches - instead of hoping for 2.0.8...) Holger -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#677943: [Packaging] Bug#677943: release critical?
Hi, Holger Levsen wrote (21 Nov 2012 09:24:05 GMT) : yeah, there is some more work left to do anyway, so just an NMU for #677943 wouldnt help much. And I'm positive to have the time to work on this during the upcoming mini- debconf in Paris this weekend, and to do an upload from there. If I still fail to do so, an NMU is more than welcome. cheers sorry for the delay... (it was partly due to me not having a clear idea what I think is best for munin in wheezy (2.0.6 is kinda crappy / has too many bugs still.. I now do have a plan for that... 2.0.6 plus lots of patches - instead of hoping for 2.0.8...) I'm happy to see there's a plan. In the meantime, I've been triaging a few bugs that are important or tagged patch, in the hope it helps clarifying what is worth cherry-picking for Wheezy. Cheers, -- intrigeri | GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/intrigeri.asc | OTR fingerprint @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/otr.asc -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#677943: [Packaging] Bug#677943: release critical?
Hi, Holger Levsen wrote (03 Nov 2012 13:33:06 GMT) : thanks indeed for re-checking this patch! I'll will upload soon! Would it help to push this out with an NMU? If we go this way, I guess the best would be to build from Vcs-Git in order to include the fix for #687715 that's already there. While we're at it, any other important enough bugs that you really want to get fixed in Wheezy, that can be fixed in a minimal enough way to go with the RC bug fix through a freeze unblock (e.g. I'm thinking of #691390 and #691758) ? Cheers, -- intrigeri | GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/intrigeri.asc | OTR fingerprint @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/otr.asc -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#677943: [Packaging] Bug#677943: release critical?
Hi, (I managed to find some time to review this patch, finally.) gregor herrmann wrote (27 Oct 2012 15:51:05 GMT) : Which means we need to create the symlink for new installs and for upgrades from this range. Correct so far? I think so. Here's an attempt to implement this idea: [...] - if [ -z $prevver ] ; then + if [ -z $prevver ] || \ + dpkg --compare-versions $prevver ge 1.4.6-1~ \\ + dpkg --compare-versions $prevver lt 1.4.7~ ; then # only create link on new installs + # or when upgrading from a version where it was removed unconditionally ln -s ../../munin/apache.conf /etc/$webserver/conf.d/munin fi if [ -f $webserver_init_script ];then [...] Please double-check if I got the logic right :) Looks good to me. Holger Levsen wrote (26 Oct 2012 23:56:23 GMT) : I fear I might just be busy with DebConf13... Thank you for taking care of this. I certainly loved a clear patch ;) Then you should be happy with gregoa's one, and Wheezy will have one less RC bug! :) Cheers! -- intrigeri | GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/intrigeri.asc | OTR fingerprint @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/otr.asc -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#677943: [Packaging] Bug#677943: release critical?
On Fri, 02 Nov 2012 21:44:27 +0100, intrigeri wrote: gregor herrmann wrote (27 Oct 2012 15:51:05 GMT) : Which means we need to create the symlink for new installs and for upgrades from this range. Correct so far? I think so. Good :) Here's an attempt to implement this idea: [...] - if [ -z $prevver ] ; then + if [ -z $prevver ] || \ + dpkg --compare-versions $prevver ge 1.4.6-1~ \\ Hm, this \\ does look like a typo ... + dpkg --compare-versions $prevver lt 1.4.7~ ; then # only create link on new installs + # or when upgrading from a version where it was removed unconditionally ln -s ../../munin/apache.conf /etc/$webserver/conf.d/munin fi if [ -f $webserver_init_script ];then [...] Please double-check if I got the logic right :) Looks good to me. Thanks! Cheers, gregor -- .''`. Homepage: http://info.comodo.priv.at/ - OpenPGP key 0xBB3A68018649AA06 : :' : Debian GNU/Linux user, admin, and developer - http://www.debian.org/ `. `' Member of VIBE!AT SPI, fellow of the Free Software Foundation Europe `- NP: Eagles signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#677943: [Packaging] Bug#677943: release critical?
Hi intrigeri, thanks indeed for re-checking this patch! I'll will upload soon! cheers, Holger -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#677943: [Packaging] Bug#677943: release critical?
On Sat, 27 Oct 2012 00:09:46 +0200, intrigeri wrote: According to debian/changelog, this was introduced in 1.4.6-1: * munin.postinst: only create link from /etc/munin/apache.conf to /etc/apache2/conf.d/munin on new installations, not on upgrades. (Closes: #619399) After reading #619399, it seems to me the answer to my question is a clear yes, so goto #2. And then we have the question, when the symlink was removed, and this changed in 1.4.6-3: * munin/postrm: only delete /etc/apache2/conf.d/munin on purge. (Closes: #653596) - Sadly the fix will only be effective the next time munin is upgraded... So, it was removed until 1.4.6-3 and only re-created until 1.4.6-1; and after 1.4.6-3 and before 1.4.6-1 everything should be ok. Which means we need to create the symlink for new installs and for upgrades from this range. Correct so far? Here's an attempt to implement this idea: #v+ diff -u munin-2.0.6/debian/changelog munin-2.0.6/debian/changelog --- munin-2.0.6/debian/changelog +++ munin-2.0.6/debian/changelog @@ -1,3 +1,14 @@ +munin (2.0.6-1.1) UNRELEASED; urgency=low + + * Non-maintainer upload. + * Fix /etc/apache2/conf.d/munin removed on upgrade: +- debian/munin.postinst: create symlink for new installs and also for + upgrades from versions where it was still removed (up to 1.4.6-3) but + not re-created (from 1.4.6-1 onwards). +(Closes: #677943) + + -- gregor herrmann gre...@debian.org Sun, 21 Oct 2012 16:27:43 +0200 + munin (2.0.6-1) unstable; urgency=high * New upstream release 2.0.6, switching back to cron graphing (as it better diff -u munin-2.0.6/debian/munin.postinst munin-2.0.6/debian/munin.postinst --- munin-2.0.6/debian/munin.postinst +++ munin-2.0.6/debian/munin.postinst @@ -63,8 +63,11 @@ webserver=apache2 webserver_init_script=/etc/init.d/$webserver if [ -d /etc/$webserver/conf.d ] [ ! -e /etc/$webserver/conf.d/munin ]; then - if [ -z $prevver ] ; then + if [ -z $prevver ] || \ + dpkg --compare-versions $prevver ge 1.4.6-1~ \\ + dpkg --compare-versions $prevver lt 1.4.7~ ; then # only create link on new installs + # or when upgrading from a version where it was removed unconditionally ln -s ../../munin/apache.conf /etc/$webserver/conf.d/munin fi if [ -f $webserver_init_script ];then #v- Please double-check if I got the logic right :) Cheers, gregor -- .''`. Homepage: http://info.comodo.priv.at/ - OpenPGP key 0xBB3A68018649AA06 : :' : Debian GNU/Linux user, admin, and developer - http://www.debian.org/ `. `' Member of VIBE!AT SPI, fellow of the Free Software Foundation Europe `- NP: Paul Simon: The Obvious Child signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#677943: [Packaging] Bug#677943: release critical?
Hi, gregor herrmann wrote (21 Oct 2012 14:50:14 GMT) : Possible solutions: 1) (re-)create the symlink unconditionally (→ attached patch) 2) create it on new installs or if $prevver = $version_that_changes_the_scripts Apparently the question boils down to is it a good idea to create the symlink only for fresh installs. If the answer is yes, then goto #2. Else, goto #1. Correct? According to debian/changelog, this was introduced in 1.4.6-1: * munin.postinst: only create link from /etc/munin/apache.conf to /etc/apache2/conf.d/munin on new installations, not on upgrades. (Closes: #619399) After reading #619399, it seems to me the answer to my question is a clear yes, so goto #2. Thoughts? Cheers! -- intrigeri | GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/intrigeri.asc | OTR fingerprint @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/otr.asc -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#677943: [Packaging] Bug#677943: release critical?
On Sat, 27 Oct 2012 00:09:46 +0200, intrigeri wrote: gregor herrmann wrote (21 Oct 2012 14:50:14 GMT) : Possible solutions: 1) (re-)create the symlink unconditionally (→ attached patch) 2) create it on new installs or if $prevver = $version_that_changes_the_scripts Apparently the question boils down to is it a good idea to create the symlink only for fresh installs. If the answer is yes, then goto #2. Else, goto #1. Correct? Yes. According to debian/changelog, this was introduced in 1.4.6-1: * munin.postinst: only create link from /etc/munin/apache.conf to /etc/apache2/conf.d/munin on new installations, not on upgrades. (Closes: #619399) After reading #619399, it seems to me the answer to my question is a clear yes, so goto #2. Thoughts? Agreed. - Thanks for looking a bit further than I did :) Cheers, gregor -- .''`. Homepage: http://info.comodo.priv.at/ - OpenPGP key 0xBB3A68018649AA06 : :' : Debian GNU/Linux user, admin, and developer - http://www.debian.org/ `. `' Member of VIBE!AT SPI, fellow of the Free Software Foundation Europe `- NP: Schmetterlinge: Wenn ich wieder reich bin signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#677943: [Packaging] Bug#677943: release critical?
Hi, thank you all for looking into this, much appreciated. I do hope to have the time to upload the fix for this during the BSP this weekend, but I fear I might just be busy with DebConf13... so if don't hold your breath, it might 2 days longer and I certainly loved a clear patch ;) cheers, Holger -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Processed: Re: Bug#677943: [Packaging] Bug#677943: release critical?
Processing control commands: tag -1 + patch Bug #677943 [munin] /etc/apache2/conf.d/munin removed on upgrade Added tag(s) patch. -- 677943: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=677943 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#677943: [Packaging] Bug#677943: release critical?
Control: tag -1 + patch On Sun, 21 Oct 2012 12:11:26 +0200, Holger Levsen wrote: On Freitag, 19. Oktober 2012, Peter Eisentraut wrote: I think this bug should be made release-critical, because it breaks the package's configuration during a routine upgrade. raising the severity until I'm sure I disagree. (little time atm, $life and dc13 preparations once again...) If I understand it correctly, the problem arises from: - the old postrm removed the symlink unconditionally (the new one does this only during purge) - the new postinst creates the symlink only for fresh installs Possible solutions: 1) (re-)create the symlink unconditionally (→ attached patch) 2) create it on new installs or if $prevver = $version_that_changes_the_scripts Cheers, gregor -- .''`. Homepage: http://info.comodo.priv.at/ - OpenPGP key 0xBB3A68018649AA06 : :' : Debian GNU/Linux user, admin, and developer - http://www.debian.org/ `. `' Member of VIBE!AT SPI, fellow of the Free Software Foundation Europe `- NP: Tom Waits: Hang On St. Christopher diff -u munin-2.0.6/debian/changelog munin-2.0.6/debian/changelog --- munin-2.0.6/debian/changelog +++ munin-2.0.6/debian/changelog @@ -1,3 +1,14 @@ +munin (2.0.6-1.1) UNRELEASED; urgency=low + + * Non-maintainer upload. + * Fix /etc/apache2/conf.d/munin removed on upgrade: +- debian/munin.postinst: always (re-)create symlink, not only on new + installs (unfortunately old versions of the postrm unconditionally + removed the symlink). +(Closes: #677943) + + -- gregor herrmann gre...@debian.org Sun, 21 Oct 2012 16:27:43 +0200 + munin (2.0.6-1) unstable; urgency=high * New upstream release 2.0.6, switching back to cron graphing (as it better diff -u munin-2.0.6/debian/munin.postinst munin-2.0.6/debian/munin.postinst --- munin-2.0.6/debian/munin.postinst +++ munin-2.0.6/debian/munin.postinst @@ -63,10 +63,7 @@ webserver=apache2 webserver_init_script=/etc/init.d/$webserver if [ -d /etc/$webserver/conf.d ] [ ! -e /etc/$webserver/conf.d/munin ]; then - if [ -z $prevver ] ; then - # only create link on new installs - ln -s ../../munin/apache.conf /etc/$webserver/conf.d/munin - fi + ln -sf ../../munin/apache.conf /etc/$webserver/conf.d/munin if [ -f $webserver_init_script ];then if [ -x $webserver_init_script ]; then invoke-rc.d $webserver reload 3/dev/null || true signature.asc Description: Digital signature
