[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#500176: This bug is still around and release-critical

also sprach Pierre Habouzit <madcoder@debian.org> [2008.10.05.1117 +0200]:
> FWIW this problem is found in many other cases: see lighttpd with
> apache2 installed, or caudium or any other http daemon, and none
> of them has a bug about it, it's unfair to mark it as RC.

Uh, don't you think that marking it down to important for this
reason is not the solution? It's not "unfair" to file an RC bug for
something I consider an RC problem: an unusable (albeit far from
corrupted) dpkg database!

> I believe the problem here is somehow very generic, and that using a
> virtual package like proposed in the bug report (#500176) doesn't scale
> well.
> [...]
> Anyways I think there is a more general solution to find and here
> are a path. The fact that Debian starts every single service on
> first install is something that we strive for, but causes some
> grief for sysadmins that don't wish to open an unprotected service
> before they configured it. It also generates the issue we're
> disussing.
> Though, we could probably do better: a bit like solaris does, we
> could have some kind of service handler that wraps every single
> service, and if the start action fails, it marks the service as
> "broken" and refuse it to start, prints whatever warning you want
> to, but doesn't prevent the package manager to do its job.

Agreed, that would be nice. While this is something to consider for
squeeze release goals, how do we solve the problem for lenny?

 .''`.   martin f. krafft <madduck@debian.org>
: :'  :  proud Debian developer, author, administrator, and user
`. `'`   http://people.debian.org/~madduck - http://debiansystem.info
  `-  Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems
"the husbands of very beautiful women
 belong to the criminal classes."
                                                        -- oscar wilde

Attachment: digital_signature_gpg.asc
Description: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/)

Reply to: