Iustin Pop wrote: > On Tue, Aug 04, 2009 at 05:01:39PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: >> Iustin Pop wrote: >>> On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 08:05:15PM +0200, Iustin Pop wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I'd like to update ganeti to stable-proposed-updates to fix the above >>>> bug. It's a simple one-line change; I see only one potential breakage >>>> out of it - if people already did the symlink fix pointed out in the >>>> bug, but with the symlink pointing to a different version of Xen, >>>> then this version will change what xen version they use. More >>>> clearly: - if currently /usr/lib/xen points to anything else than >>>> /usr/lib/xen-3.2-1, then >>>> - this upload will break people's HVM-based clusters >>>> >>>> Here is the proposed diff: >>> […] >>>> Let me know if this is OK or not, or if you need more information. >>> Ping? Did I miss some crucial information that is needed? >> The one thing that concerns me is the potential breakage you raised >> yourself. Is it possible to detect that the user has moved the >> symlink and leave it as-is? > > Well, if we're looking at a minimal diff then not. > > Basically, upstream has hardcoded /usr/lib/xen, but Lenny has > /usr/lib/xen-3.2-1. The current patch just changes the hardcoded path. > > A flexible solution would be to change this to /usr/lib/xen-ganeti, > which would be a symlink created at package install time to point to > either /usr/lib/xen (if it already exists, which means users have > customized their system to fit the current buggy upstream) or to > /usr/lib/xen-3.2-1 (or the first xen directory found). > > This would mean a bigger diff, and seems to me slightly worse than a > NEWS.Debian entry detailing the change; but granted, it would be > automatic. What is usually done in a such a situation?
I would go for just changing the hardcoded path and adding a NEWS.Debian entry. Please do mention the bugreport (#528618). Cheers Luk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
