Re: Does kernel-package assume /etc/psdatabase -> /boot/psdatabase?
In message <[🔎] m0urlA3-0000U8C@franz.stat.wisc.edu>, Douglas Bates writes:
>so after running /sbin/psupdate there is an attempt to find if
>/boot/psdatabase-2.0.12 exists. The documentation for psupdate
>indicates that it writes a new version of /etc/psdatabase. I checked
>and indeed that file was updated. Am I supposed to have a link from
>/etc/psdatabase to /boot/psdatabase? This sequence would make sense
>to me if that was the case.
This has been brought up a couple of times in as many weeks.
It looks like what we're seeing is a change in behavior in psupdate.
Here's a patch to be applied to
/usr/lib/kernel-package/debian/image.postinst:
--- image.postinst.~1~ Thu Jul 18 02:16:18 1996
+++ image.postinst Wed Aug 14 11:53:45 1996
@@ -69,8 +69,9 @@
unlink("/boot/psdatabase");
symlink("/boot/psdatabase-$version", "/boot/psdatabase");
system("/sbin/psupdate /boot/vmlinux-$version");
- if ( -f "/boot/psdatabase-$version" ) {
+ if ( -f "/etc/psdatabase" ) {
unlink("/boot/vmlinux-$version");
+ system("mv /etc/psdatabase /boot/psdatabase-$version" );
}
else {
print "\nAn error seems to have ocurred while generating the\n";
I'm still waiting for someone to let me know if psupdate was working
before and is now broken so the bug can be refiled against it, or
whether it was broken and is now working, in which case I'll release a
new kernel-package.
Mike.
--
"Don't let me make you unhappy by failing to be contrary enough...."
Reply to: