> > I have a couple of inputs I'll try to get you in the morning. > > > > Scott K > > One user (hi leonel) of the test package I made for Ubuntu of 0.95-1 > reported: > > > ScottK: Setting up clamav-base (0.95+dfsg-1~ppa2) ... > chown: cannot access `/var/run/clamav': No such file or directory > dpkg: error processing clamav-base (--configure): > subprocess post-installation script returned error exit status 1 > leonel: Does /var/run/clamav exist? > If it does, then I'm thinking apparmor. > ScottK: was an upgrade and the dir didn't existed > ScottK: created and upgrade went fine > > On Ubuntu /var/run defaults to a tempfs (and this is a config the package > supports). I looked on the postinst and while the postinst chown's > /var/run/clamav, I don't see where it ensures it's been created by that > time. So I think this needs to be addressed. I confess not to have had a > lot of time to look into this, so I might have missed something. >
That should be addressed by the latest git commit. I had removed /var/run/clamav from the directories being created by the package install, but forgot to drop that logic in the postinst. > Several months ago I added make check to debian/rules in Ubuntu. Except > for a lot of failures from the valgrind checks (which led to upstream > disabling the valgrind checks by default), I haven't had any problems. I > think running the tests during the build is a generally good practice and > now, at the start of a release cycle, is a good time for Debian to do this > too. > That has already been addressed 0.95+dfsg-1 upload (valgrind checks aren't enabled). > Finally, we've discussed before adding apparmor as a suggests (it doesn't > exist in the Debian archive, but Debian users may have added it locally) > and incorporating the Ubuntu apparmor profile in the package. The bind9 > package in Debian also does this, so there is precedent. Patch attached. > > That's all I have. This covers all of the current Debian/Ubuntu diff in > the package. > Hmm, bind9 doesn't even suggest apparmor (only conflicts/replaces some older versions). Would it be fine if we omit that suggests, but include all the other stuff? Thanks, Michael
pgpJh5Pafe3go.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Pkg-clamav-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-clamav-devel
