Bug#416330: server upgrade w/ stock linux 2.6.8 succeeds with some minor issues
On Tue, Mar 27, 2007 at 01:09:05AM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> Package: upgrade-reports
> Severity: normal
> <quote>
> rmh@feanor:~$ sudo aptitude unmarkauto openoffice.org vim $(dpkg-query -W 'kernel-image-2.6*' | cut -f1)
> [...]
> The following packages are unused and will be REMOVED:
> apache2 defoma fontconfig libfontconfig1 ttf-bitstream-vera
> 0 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 5 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
> [...]
> Purging category type1..
> fc-cache: error while loading shared libraries: libfontconfig.so.1: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
> Removing ttf-bitstream-vera ...
> </quote>
> Any particular reason for removing apache2 ?
Because that's what the aptitude state for these packages said should be
done? Note that aptitude says the packages are *unused* and will be
removed; except for bug #411123, this can only be a result of an admin's
decisions, so I don't see that there's anything that needs to be documented
here?
> As for the fc-cache error, looks quite ugly although unimportant. Should I
> file a bug on its owner, asking to move the adequate bits from postrm to
> prerm ?
No, that's a bug in the old version of the package, the etch version of the
package doesn't have this error.
> <quote>
> Configuration file `/etc/hotplug.d/default/default.hotplug'
> ==> Modified (by you or by a script) since installation.
> ==> Package distributor has shipped an updated version.
> What would you like to do about it ? Your options are:
> Y or I : install the package maintainer's version
> N or O : keep your currently-installed version
> D : show the differences between the versions
> Z : background this process to examine the situation
> The default action is to keep your current version.
> *** default.hotplug (Y/I/N/O/D/Z) [default=N] ? y
> </quote>
> This makes no sense. That file didn't even exist in my system before the
> update (I checked yesterday's backup).
which means that a conffile belonging to the hotplug package had been
removed locally from your system -- this conffile prompt is correct in such
a case.
> <quote>
> The following NEW packages will be installed:
> analog apache2-doc apache2.2-common at bin86 bind9 bind9-doc bison
> ca-certificates cpp-4.1 dc debian-archive-keyring dhcp-client discover1
> discover1-data dlint dmidecode doc-debian doc-linux-text eject fdutils
> flex ftp g++ g++-3.3 g++-4.1 gcc-4.1 gcc-4.1-base gnu-efi gpgv iamerican
> ibritish iptables iputils-ping ispell laptop-detect libapache2-mod-perl2
> libapache2-mod-python libapr1 libaprutil1 libarchive-tar-perl libbind9-0
> libc-client2002edebian libcompress-zlib-perl libdb4.4 libdbd-pg-perl
> libdbi-perl libdevel-symdump-perl libdiscover1 libdns22 libedit2
> libevent1 libfribidi0 libgc1c2 libgnutls13 libgssapi2 libhtml-parser-perl
> libhtml-tagset-perl libhtml-tree-perl libident libio-zlib-perl libisc11
> libisccc0 libisccfg1 liblockfile1 libltdl3 liblwres9 libmailutils1
> libmudflap0 libmudflap0-dev libmysqlclient15off libnet-daemon-perl
> libnewt0.52 libnfsidmap2 libnss-db libpcap0.7 libpci2 libpg-perl
> libplrpc-perl libpq4 librpcsecgss3 libsasl2-2 libsasl2-modules
> libsigc++-2.0-0c2a libslang2 libsocket6-perl libsqlite3-0 libssl0.9.8
> libssp0 libstdc++5-3.3-dev libstdc++6 libstdc++6-4.1-dev libtasn1-3
> libwww-perl libxml2 lpr lsof lwresd m4 mailagent manpages manpages-dev
> mawk mdetect mktemp mlock mpack mtools mysql-common ncurses-term
> nfs-common nvi openbsd-inetd openssh-client openssh-server pidentd
> portmap postgresql postgresql-7.4 postgresql-client-7.4
> postgresql-client-common postgresql-common postgresql-contrib
> postgresql-contrib-7.4 postgresql-doc postgresql-doc-7.4 ppp pppconfig
> pppoe pppoeconf python-central python-minimal python-newt python-support
> python2.4-minimal rcs read-edid readline-common sharutils spamassassin
> spamc sysvinit-utils tasksel tasksel-data tcsh telnet texinfo time
> traceroute update-inetd uw-imapd
> </quote>
> This is overbroad. In particular, I have no use for postgresql, ppp,
> spamassassin or uw-imapd.
> It seems that for some reason tasksel decided that I want web, dns, and
> mail tasks (that's what it displays post-upgrade). OTOH, before upgrade
> tasksel wasn't even installed. When installing and running it in my
> backup copy, web and mail tasks (but NOT dns) were enabled (I've never
> enabled them, although this could well have been done during install
> -it's a colo-).
This is from aptitude dist-upgrade, right? I don't believe that honors task
settings; more likely these are the results of recommends?
Do these same packages show up if you run aptitude --without-recommends
dist-upgrade? (I don't think that would be a reasonable suggestion to put
in the release notes in any case, an expert user who knows what they want
can always remove packages after the fact or come to --without-recommends or
apt-get on their own, but it would be good to know the precise reason for
these unwanted additions.)
I certainly don't believe that tasksel is going to have chosen tasks for you
automatically, so those must have been selected manually at some point -- so
colo setup seems reasonably likely.
> <quote>
> Preparing to replace ucf 1.17 (using .../archives/ucf_2.0020_all.deb) ...
> Unpacking replacement ucf ...
> dpkg: apache2-common: dependency problems, but removing anyway as you request:
> apache2-mpm-prefork depends on apache2-common (= 2.0.54-5sarge1); however:
> Package apache2-common is to be removed.
> (Reading database ... 22793 files and directories currently installed.)
> Removing apache2-common ...
> Stopping web server: Apache2.
> (Reading database ... 22420 files and directories currently installed.)
> Preparing to replace apache2-mpm-prefork 2.0.54-5sarge1 (using .../apache2-mpm-prefork_2.2.3-3.3_i386.deb) ...
> Stopping web server: Apache2 ... failed!
> You may still have some apache2 processes running. There are
> processes named 'apache2' which do not match your pid file,
> and in the name of safety, we've left them alone. Please review
> the situation by hand.
> .
> Stopping web server: Apache2 ... failed!
> You may still have some apache2 processes running. There are
> processes named 'apache2' which do not match your pid file,
> and in the name of safety, we've left them alone. Please review
> the situation by hand.
> </quote>
> That was a bit scary (as in service being interrupted during the whole
> upgrade). If it's harmless, I think it should be documented.
I wouldn't say it's harmless; it has been reported separately as bug
#416231.
> <quote>
> Setting up qpopper (4.0.5.dfsg-0.1) ...
> --------- IMPORTANT INFORMATION FOR XINETD USERS ----------
> The following line will be added to your /etc/inetd.conf file:
> pop-3\t\tstream\ttcp\tnowait\troot\t/usr/sbin/tcpd\t/usr/sbin/in.qpopper -f /etc/qpopper.conf
> If you are indeed using xinetd, you will have to convert the
> above into /etc/xinetd.conf format, and add it manually. See
> /usr/share/doc/xinetd/README.Debian for more information.
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> </quote>
> I had a bunch of similar warnings. It's a bit confusing since I already
> had setup the pop3 line in xinetd before upgrade, and no change was in
> fact needed.
Not going to be fixed for etch, certainly. The need for an update-inetd
implementation for xinetd is well-known, and not conceivable to solve for
etch.
Thanks,
--
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
vorlon@debian.org http://www.debian.org/
Reply to: