Bug#404894: marked as done (update-initramfs: zero exit status when initramfs is altered or does not exist)
Your message dated Sun, 31 Dec 2006 11:03:23 +0100
with message-id <20061231100323.GA24706@nancy>
and subject line Bug#404894: update-initramfs: zero exit status when initramfs is altered or does not exist
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--- Begin Message ---
Package: initramfs-tools
Version: 0.85e
I think that update-initramfs should return some non-zero error status
when trying to update a non-existing or altered initramfs.
Currently, when I am trying to configure e.g. an uswsusp package
(dpkg-reconfigure uswsusp), and have initramfs removed, the
configuration script calls update-initramfs, which does not update
anything (because of non-existing initramfs) - it only shows the error
message
/boot/initrd.img-2.6.17-2-686 does not exist. Cannot update.
(that is good) and exits with error status 0. The result is that uswsusp
is not properly configured, but dpkg-reconfigure exits with status 0 -
which should not happen, I think (I would expect dpkg-reconfigure to
exit with non-zero error status).
I suggest to use panic() instead of mild_panic() in altered_check() in
the update-initramfs script.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Fri, 29 Dec 2006, Tomas Tintera wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Dec 2006 09:41 +0100, maximilian attems wrote:
> > unless you come up with a _really_ compelling arg, that wasn't presented
> > yet and that supersedes aboves analysis, i'll close that bug soon.
>
> Ok, so I think it is likely that the user overlooks this error message
> if he installs more packages simultaneously (the message is shown
> through stderr and may be quickly scrolled out from the terminal), but
> that seems to be the problem of debconf or something so.
>
> You can close the bug.
ok doing.
well there are fatal cases of lilo failures, where the user
does not read the message although the postinst fails.
in that case the user overlooking is not fatal, so.. :)
happy new year
--
maks
--- End Message ---
Reply to: