Your message dated Fri, 23 Feb 2018 08:48:14 +0100
with message-id <20180223074813.ga32...@alf.mars>
and subject line Re: Bug#887255: lvm2 should depend on e2fsprogs explicitly
has caused the Debian Bug report #887255,
regarding lvm2 should depend on e2fsprogs explicitly
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact

Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: lvm2
Version: 2.02.176-4.1
Usertags: nonessentiale2fsprogs

Dear maintainer,

We want to make removing e2fsprogs from installations possible. For standard
installations this is not useful, but embedded applications and chroots benefit
from such an option.  For getting there all packages that use e2fsprogs must be
identified and gain a dependency on it as e2fsprogs currently is essential.

lvm2 was identified as potentially needing such a dependency,
because it mentions tool names from e2fsprogs in the following files:

/sbin/fsadm contains resize2fs and tune2fs. According to file it is a 
Bourne-Again shell script, ASCII text executable

Please investigate whether these cases are actually uses of a tool from
e2fsprogs. Care has been taken to shrink the number of candidates as much as
possible, but a few false positives will remain. After doing so, do one of the

 * Add e2fsprogs to Depends.
 * Add e2fsprogs to Recommends.
 * Close this bug explaining why e2fsprogs is not used by this package.

Once e2fsprogs drops the "Essential: yes" flag, this bug will be upgraded to RC
severity. Please note that lintian will warn about such a dependency before
lintian 2.5.56.

Thanks for your help


--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 10:17:08AM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 10:09:14AM +0100, Andreas Henriksson wrote:
> > The fsadm(.sh) script does indeed invoke both tune2fs and resize2fs
> > under certain circumstances, so from a laymans view there should
> > definitely be a dependency added.
> It also needs resize_reiserfs and xfs_growfs, but there is no
> dependencies for them, so I don't consider that a worthy candidate for
> this minor funtionality.

Thank you for your assessment. I agree and am thus closing this bug as
"no action needed" then.


--- End Message ---

Reply via email to