Am Freitag, den 01.07.2016, 19:17 +0200 schrieb Santiago Vila: > On Fri, 1 Jul 2016, Benjamin Drung wrote: > > > Because lsb-release is not installed on all system, but base-files > is. > > My intention for getting VERSION_CODENAME defined for jessie is to > > develop a proper fix for https://github.com/saltstack/salt/issues/3 > 4423 > > Let's see: > > On a Debian 8 (jessie) system where lsb-release is not installed, > [...] > > So why don't you just declare lsb-release required for that > particular feature to work?
It's not one particular feature. The salt minion has grains (variables) and oscodename is one grain that every minion has. So this value is wrong without lsb-release on all minion. Thus it's not just a broken feature, but broken for all. I like to keep the list of dependencies small. So installing lsb- release is not my first choice. > If you consider this a bug at all, your intended fix (rely on the > /etc/os-release file) would only half-fix it, because it would still > be wrong in testing and unstable. I know, but we could use other fallbacks there. > BTW: In general, relying on the codename is a bad idea and it's > something I would prefer not to encourage. We should rely on actual > features being present or absent, not on the system being at a > particular version. I know. salt puts the codename in the oscodename pillar and user can use it for whatever they want to. We use the oscodename pillar to generate source.list entries. -- Benjamin Drung System Developer Debian & Ubuntu Developer ProfitBricks GmbH Greifswalder Str. 207 D - 10405 Berlin Email: benjamin.dr...@profitbricks.com URL: http://www.profitbricks.com Sitz der Gesellschaft: Berlin. Registergericht: Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 125506B. Geschäftsführer: Andreas Gauger, Achim Weiss.
