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

Bug#684732: unblock: nut/2.6.4-2



On Sat, 1 Dec 2012 12:13:06 +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 21:50:17 +0100, Sébastien Villemot wrote:
> 
> > Control: retitle -1 unblock: nut/2.6.4-2.1
> > 
> > Upon request of Arnaud Quette, I have uploaded a NMU of nut
> > versioned 2.6.4-2.1, which fixes RC bug #677054. The change
> > relative to the previous version in unstable (2.6.4-2) is that I
> > have added a preinst script in nut-client.
> > 
> > For completeness, I attach the debdiff of the new version
> > (2.6.4-2.1) against the version currently in Wheezy (2.6.4-1).
> > 
> 
> > diff -Nru nut-2.6.4/debian/control nut-2.6.4/debian/control
> > --- nut-2.6.4/debian/control	2012-06-06 21:06:03.000000000
> > +0200 +++ nut-2.6.4/debian/control	2012-08-12
> > 20:39:01.000000000 +0200 @@ -24,6 +24,7 @@
> >  
> >  Package: nut
> >  Architecture: all
> > +Section: metapackages
> >  Depends: ${misc:Depends}, nut-server, nut-client
> >  Description: network UPS tools - metapackage
> >   Network UPS Tools (NUT) is a client/server monitoring system that
> > @@ -32,7 +33,8 @@
> >   through the server, and are notified whenever the power status
> >   changes.
> >   .
> > - This package is a metapackage that install both nut-server and
> > nut-client
> > + This package is a metapackage that install both nut-server and
> > nut-client,
> > + in most cases it is sufficient for a basic UPS monitoring system.
> >  
> s/install/&s/

Thanks, fixed in git

[...]
> > diff -Nru nut-2.6.4/debian/nut-cgi.postrm
> > nut-2.6.4/debian/nut-cgi.postrm ---
> > nut-2.6.4/debian/nut-cgi.postrm	2012-06-06
> > 21:06:03.000000000 +0200 +++ nut-2.6.4/debian/nut-cgi.postrm
> > 2012-08-12 20:39:01.000000000 +0200 @@ -44,3 +44,4 @@ 
> >  #DEBHELPER#
> >  
> > +exit 0
> 
> Why?  Changelog doesn't seem to mention it.

If a condition is failing earlier in the script (which can be expected),
it's possible that the script will exit with a != 0 status.

> 
> > diff -Nru nut-2.6.4/debian/nut-client.lintian-overrides
> > nut-2.6.4/debian/nut-client.lintian-overrides ---
> > nut-2.6.4/debian/nut-client.lintian-overrides	1970-01-01
> > 01:00:00.000000000 +0100 +++
> > nut-2.6.4/debian/nut-client.lintian-overrides	2012-08-12
> > 20:39:01.000000000 +0200 @@ -0,0 +1 @@ +nut-client:
> > script-in-etc-init.d-not-registered-via-update-rc.d
> 
> What is that about?

The package is shipping a symlink (ups-monitor -> nut-client) which is
used by /etc/init.d/halt to cut the power off the UPS. This symlink
should obviously not be added to any runlevel.

[...]
> > +    # make sure that conffiles are secured and have the correct
> > ownerships
> > +    if [ -d /etc/nut/ ] ; then
> > +      chown root:nut /etc/nut/
> > +    fi
> > +    for file in nut.conf upsmon.conf upssched.conf ; do
> > +        if [ -f /etc/nut/$file ] ; then
> > +            chown root:nut /etc/nut/$file
> > +            chmod 640 /etc/nut/$file
> > +        fi
> > +    done
> > +
> 
> I still think the chowns/chmods shouldn't be done on upgrades, if for
> whatever reason the local admin changed those that's their choice.

Is this really blocking the transition? The version in squeeze is also
doing this. We could remove this later I guess.

[...]
> > -      # re process nut.conf MODE so that it can be sourced
> > -      NUT_MODE=`grep -e '^ *MODE' /etc/nut/nut.conf | tr -d " "`
> > -      sed "s/^ *MODE.*/$NUT_MODE/" /etc/nut/nut.conf
> > > /etc/nut/nut.conf.new
> > -      mv /etc/nut/nut.conf.new /etc/nut/nut.conf
> > +    if dpkg --compare-versions "$2" le "2.6.4-2~" ; then
> > +        rm -f /etc/init.d/nut
> > +        update-rc.d nut remove >/dev/null
> 
> If /etc/init.d/nut was a conffile, I don't think you get to rm -f it
> on upgrade, at least if it was modified.

IIRC, I didn't use dpkg-maintscript-helper because the file is owned by
the nut package in squeeze (which is now a metapackage) and it was not
really working as expected. The init file should probably also be
removed in the nut-client package to support partial upgrades.

Cheers

Laurent Bigonville


Reply to: