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

Re: Bug#537492: menu: Binary without execution bits.



Hello -devel, I need a tiny wider audience for that one.

Bill Allombert <Bill.Allombert@math.u-bordeaux1.fr> (18/07/2009):
> On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 09:35:57PM +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> > Package: menu
> > Version: 2.1.41
> > Severity: grave
> > Justification: Fucks up upgrades.
> > 
> > Sounds like some bits are missing:
> > | -rw-r--r-- root/root    122920 2008-10-24 21:03 ./usr/bin/update-menus
> > 
> > Which leads to:
> > | install/elserv: Deleting /tmp/elc_eXSJx7.log
> > | install/devscripts-el: Handling emacs21, logged in /tmp/elc_U0zTnA.log
> > | install/devscripts-el: Deleting /tmp/elc_U0zTnA.log
> > | /var/lib/dpkg/info/emacs21.postinst: line 24: /usr/bin/update-menus: Permission denied
> > | dpkg : erreur de traitement de emacs21 (--configure) :
> > |  le sous-processus script post-installation installé a retourné une erreur de sortie d'état 1
> > | Des erreurs ont été rencontrées pendant l'exécution :
> > |  emacs21
> > | E: dpkg returned non-zero status: 256
> > | E: error performing command 'full-upgrade'
> > 
> > (Sorry about the French bits, but heh.)
> > 
> > No surprise, chmod is used in menu's postinst. WTF?
> 
> /var/lib/dpkg/info/emacs21.postinst is broken, not menu.

I'm repeating here what I said on the bugreport, because I think that
(Houston) we've got a problem. It's quite classical to use the following
bit to test for a binary to call:
| if [ -x "`which invoke-rc.d 2>/dev/null`" ]

See debhelper's sources:
| git grep -e '-x.*which'|wc -l
| 12

But:
| $ if [ -x `which icanhazfailure 2>/dev/null` ] ; then echo FAIL ; fi
| FAIL

And also, under zsh:
| $ which doublefailure 2>/dev/null   
| doublefailure not found

Leading to:
| if [ -x `which icanhazfailure 2>/dev/null` ] ; then echo FAIL ; fi
| [: too many arguments

I guess we need a plan to fix some maintainer scripts, or am I grossly
overlooking things here?

Mraw,
KiBi.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: