Re: linux-2.6 piuparts error
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 11:27:04AM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> * maximilian attems | 2009-11-17 11:10:46 [+0100]:
>
> >0m54.3s ERROR: FAIL: Package purging left files on system:
> > /etc/kernel-img.conf not owned
>
> oh
>
> >so either it is a failure to generate such a file in postinst (as we
> >shouldn't really need it!?), or one would want to remove it on purge,
> >which opens another can of worms as this file is unowned in real boxes
> >and usualy created by d-i.
> >
> >the best argument is that due to the convulated questions postinst
> >wanted to ask you in the past we had never reached that point of
> >generating this conffile in postinst.
>
> What is the long term goal? Do you plan do to get rid of kernel-img.conf
> and let the individual boot loader handle this kind of things?
yes indeed the long term plan is to get rid of kernel-img.conf
any eventual hooks there should be gone with lenny+1
what they should do is leave hooks in /etc/kernel dirs,
grub has such a whishlist open, hope it gots resolved soon.
> You are changing the default behavior of palo here.
Only in the case that no /etc/kernel-img.conf existed yet.
haven't checked what the consequences of that particular change in the
other maintainer scripts.
> However the values
> are written very late. link_in_boot for instance is only evalueted at
> the begin of the script. So it should not really matter for postinst at
> least.
right
> The do_symlink thing is only required by people that don't have their
> setup right, isn't it? So grub refers to /vmlinuz but kernel itself is
> not in / but in /boot. So if those people would fix their boxes we could
> get rid of do_symlink for instance right?
any sane bootloader shouldn't need that symlink mess indeed.
afaik grub refers to the kernel directly in /boot,
but it is lilo and many other bootloaders that prefers to have that symlinking.
so it might indeed be worth also to have d-i updated on their generated
kernel-img.conf
thanks for your review!
Reply to: