Bug#245415: preinst script does not stop apache, thus postinst fail
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Package: apache
Version: 1.3.29.0.2-5
Severity: important
When upgrading from 1.3.29 (sid), apache is not stopped (only when
upgrading from 1.3.28 or lower).
So, when 'invoke-rc.d apache start' is called in postinst, it fails
(apache is already running).
Workaround : /etc/init.d/apache stop && dpkg --configure -a
I don't understand why apache should only be stopped if version <=
1.3.28, so I can't provide a patch... :/
- -- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
~ APT prefers unstable
~ APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Kernel: Linux 2.6.4-1-k7-evms
Locale: LANG=fr_FR@euro, LC_CTYPE=fr_FR@euro
Versions of packages apache depends on:
ii apache-common 1.3.29.0.2-5 Support files for all
Apache webse
ii debconf 1.4.22 Debian configuration
management sy
ii dpkg 1.10.20 Package maintenance
system for Deb
ii libc6 2.3.2.ds1-11 GNU C Library: Shared
libraries an
ii libdb4.2 4.2.52-16 Berkeley v4.2 Database
Libraries [
ii libexpat1 1.95.6-8 XML parsing C library -
runtime li
ii libmagic1 4.07-2 File type determination
library us
ii libpam0g 0.76-19 Pluggable Authentication
Modules l
ii logrotate 3.6.5-2 Log rotation utility
ii mime-support 3.26-1 MIME files 'mime.types' &
'mailcap
ii perl 5.8.3-3 Larry Wall's Practical
Extraction
- -- debconf information:
* apache/enable-suexec: false
* apache/server-name: perso.homelinux.org
* apache/document-root: /var/www
* apache/server-port: 80
* apache/init: true
* apache/server-admin: webmaster@perso.homelinux.org
- --
Clément 'nodens' Hermann
- - "L'air pur ? c'est pas en RL, ça ? c'est pas hors charte ?"
Jean in L'Histoire des Pingouins, http://tnemeth.free.fr/fmbl/linuxsf/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Debian - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFAiH5S0yQ2guvROZ0RAsOcAJ9pYhJnLY7dmnxpe9PxfNnkE+AU6wCeL41B
U3yO7XJ3qZpeMUJPMWu00KI=
=+1CW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: