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

Re: Bug#502823: iodine: piuparts test fails: /var/lib/dpkg/info/iodine.postinst: line 27: ./MAKEDEV: No such file or directory



gregor herrmann schrieb am Monday, den 20. October 2008:

> On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 07:28:07 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> 
> > During tests using piuparts of all packages in lenny,
> > I ran into the following problem:
> 
> Thanks for your tests and the bug report!
>  
> > >   Setting up udev (0.125-7) ...
> > >   unable to open device '/class/net/*'
> > >   A chroot environment has been detected, udev not started.
> [..]
> > >   /var/lib/dpkg/info/iodine.postinst: line 27: ./MAKEDEV: No such file or directory
> > >   dpkg: error processing iodine (--configure):
> > >    subprocess post-installation script returned error exit status 1
> > >   Errors were encountered while processing:
> > >    iodine
> > >   E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1)
> 
> Ah, fun with udev in a chroot.
> But unconditionally calling MAKEDEV in postinst is of course no good
> idea ...
> 
> After looking at some other .postinst files I have prepared the
> following patch now:
> 
> #v+
> 
> Index: debian/postinst
> ===================================================================
> --- debian/postinst	(revision 1469)
> +++ debian/postinst	(working copy)
> @@ -23,8 +23,11 @@
>  case "$1" in
>      configure)
>          # we need a tun device
> -        echo "Creating device /dev/net/tun ..."
> -        cd /dev && ./MAKEDEV tun
> +        if [ ! -c /dev/net/tun ] && [ -x /dev/MAKEDEV ] ; then
> +            echo "Creating device /dev/net/tun ..."
> +            cd /dev
> +            ./MAKEDEV tun || true
> +        fi
>          # and we want a special user
>          adduser --quiet --system --home /var/run/iodine iodine
>          # generate /etc/default/iodine
*snipp*

> Any comments on the patch?
if [ -d "/dev/.static" ]; then
	cd /dev/.static
	./MAKEDEV ....
else 
	cd /dev/
	./MAKEDEV 
fi

Should be nicer. 

Alex


Reply to: