В Thu, 8 Nov 2012 19:45:00 +0100 Julien Cristau <jcristau@debian.org> пишет: > On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 13:26:33 +0400, Alexander Golovko wrote: > > > ohh. i think, that will be better to split explanation of this > > change into two parts. > > > > First - changes in sysvinit scripts. Instead of run daemons as root > > and pass options for chuid we allow start-stop-daemon to run it as > > non-root. This is what do upstream and without this fix we have a > > problems with getting backtraces on daemons crashes. > > > That doesn't sound like freeze material to me, as the current scripts > work. I don't understand your comment about backtraces. bacula daemons SIGSEGV handler can call gdb for save some useful (for developers) info about process (stack for all threads and other). Gdb called with bacula user privileges, but files in /proc/<pid>/ owned by root and gdb can't get info about process. This is subject of bug #556207. Yes, user still must install "-dbg" packages before this will work, but this is not so hard work for them as manually changing init scripts. > > > Second - changes in systemd service files. In 5.2.6+dfsg-1 our team > > add this files into packages, but unfortunely, they was shipped with > > incorrect (empty) uid/gid in them. > > So, for systemd service files was fixed two problems: > > a) Change daemons uid/gid by systemd, as do sysvinit scripts. This > > is separate patch [1] for simplicity sending it to upstream (already > > accepted by upstream) > > b) Fixing incorrect uid/gid. Due to limitation of upstream build > > system we can't use build options and hardcore uid/gid by patch [2] > > > > [1] > > http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=pkg-bacula/bacula.git;a=blob;f=debian/patches/delegate-chuid-to-systemd.patch > > [2] > > http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=pkg-bacula/bacula.git;a=blob;f=debian/patches/fix-systemd-daemon-user-group.patch > > > > As i understand, your opinion is that will be better do not ship > > systemd service files at all, but include changes in sysvinit > > scripts? > > > I don't think that reflects my opinion. My understanding is that the > current init script works, and if that is true then the current init > script doesn't need to be changed. Current init scripts work, but have a bug, as described above. > I don't particularly care what > happens to the systemd files, though if the current ones don't work > then I'd kinda prefer to see them go away rather than get more > changes. Hmm, but if users want worked systemd files (#679958), is it really prefer to drop systemd support over fix problem? -- with best regards, Alexander Golovko email: alexandro@ankalagon.ru xmpp: alexandro@ankalagon.ru
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature