Bug#693688: The last patch to fix #691422 breaks other init scripts
Control: retitle -1 pidofproc enforces the presence of pathname, thereby breaking wrong uses of it Control: severity -1 important Control: tag -1 +wontfix Hi Klaus, as you might have seen, I have cloned this bug against exim4-base as the use of pidofproc there is incorrect. That's where it should be fixed IMHO, as the pidofproc syntax is documented that way, both in LSB and the lsb-base package documentation for ages. The pidofproc fix of #691422 only enforces the correct syntax. Le lundi, 19 novembre 2012 12.30:39, Klaus Ethgen a écrit : > > As discussed in #691422, pidofproc was never meant to be used with a > > different arguments order, > > I do not know about the intended use. I never dig into pidofproc before. > I just know that exim init script (and maybe other) is broken after > updating lsb-base. In fact, it was broken (and working by chance) before. > > so I think it's not an lsb-base responsibility if other init scripts > > wrongly using it now fail when it enforces a correct behaviour. > > That might be. But shouldn't it be checked before make an incompatible > change and notifying the relevant maintainers? For what is worth, I checked through the Debian-provided initscripts to see if the arguments of pidofproc were reversed in some: that was not the case. I didn't think that some scripts would be using pidofproc wrongly. So, for this bug, I'm downgrading it to important and tagging it wontfix, so that other occurences of the exim4-base bug can be set as blocking it. Cheers, OdyX -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#693688: The last patch to fix #691422 breaks other init scripts
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Hi, Thanks for this fast response. Am Mo den 19. Nov 2012 um 11:50 schrieb Didier 'OdyX' Raboud: > Le lundi, 19 novembre 2012 10.51:21, Klaus Ethgen a écrit : > > The last patch to fix #691422 will break init scripts of unrelated > > software like for example exim. Please roll it back. I set the severity > > to critical for this reason; breaking unrelated software. > > As I can't verify your assertion here, using Wheezy's exim's initscript, and > as: > > $ grep pidofproc /etc/init.d/exim4 > if pidofproc -p "$QRPIDFILE" >/dev/null; then > if pidofproc -p "$PIDFILE" >/dev/null; then > > Could you please detail your "will break init scripts of unrelated software" > ? > (tagging as +moreinfo) Well, /etc/init.d/exim4 status end with return code 4 after the update; in any cases. (That was how I saw it, as puppet do use it to see if the daemon is running.) > As discussed in #691422, pidofproc was never meant to be used with a > different > arguments order, I do not know about the intended use. I never dig into pidofproc before. I just know that exim init script (and maybe other) is broken after updating lsb-base. > so I think it's not an lsb-base responsibility if other init scripts > wrongly using it now fail when it enforces a correct behaviour. That might be. But shouldn't it be checked before make an incompatible change and notifying the relevant maintainers? > For now, I'm downgrading this to serious. No problem with that. I set the severity just according the corresponding notes in bugreport. Regards Klaus - -- Klaus Ethgen http://www.ethgen.ch/ pub 4096R/4E20AF1C 2011-05-16 Klaus Ethgen Fingerprint: 85D4 CA42 952C 949B 1753 62B3 79D0 B06F 4E20 AF1C -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iQGcBAEBCgAGBQJQqhheAAoJEKZ8CrGAGfasbSQL/itOziu1sWYhK26zn9H8I24a X86+gM5FEHNro4FL/EwbrusiMZLgWSKtm0Lm4akSeySMmsRhrDbZdyiN2KoioFhG AYXEo5uNcemslRIx9fjWw6EhAj8b4+51ft/Z0Y4FnKrY1VlM6hlBGYmNYoS7X+/K xWT/5+JQLQs8ALJtFPnj9W6LVzucbsXp3pCLQ5jqxUjeAsmbUExvYAwylKJhk5ty iMHQSaNDxZYExdZJChZiXEs/odRPsuak0WhKzgJftnV+UF3oMGkmc8FCLc3oojny yRPfRtIb67VGH1FGWI3RaXrgxNq60/xxfr/SV7+W/xiYvug7kbxJYSioUfUGjoWW kSJC7hJ5NcZduABCWZeYDq4mddjN+9sQfjo8M7vYZGk2iPJRbmDSIUuOR+rS6iGH KY0HrpwVXv8zeQBU4wMsg9Llll7yCg2OhnB05KxkIulBEKbVTLAPNcaRIcA6OLlS rsDO346w9wErVn3gfvE/a3g4Ln3gYcaJgPv0Yhe+Vg== =xJdv -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#693688: The last patch to fix #691422 breaks other init scripts
Control: clone -1 -2 Control: reassign -2 exim4-base Control: retitle -2 /etc/init.d/exim4 uses pidofproc wrongly Control: severity -2 important Control: block -1 by -2 Hi dear exim4 maintainers, as the 693688 bug and lsb-base 4.1+Debian9 reveal, /etc/init.d/exim4 uses pidofproc from /lib/lsb/init-functions wrongly: Le lundi, 19 novembre 2012 11.50:02, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud a écrit : > $ grep pidofproc /etc/init.d/exim4 > if pidofproc -p "$QRPIDFILE" >/dev/null; then > if pidofproc -p "$PIDFILE" >/dev/null; then pidofproc is documented as follows in the lsb-base README.Debian.gz: > pidofproc [-p pidfile] pathname > Find the process ID of pathname. If the pidfile is specified, we use the > first space-delimited word; otherwise, /bin/pidof is used from the > sysvinit package, if available. The pathname argument is mandatory, see also [0]. Cheers, OdyX [0] http://refspecs.linuxbase.org/LSB_4.1.0/LSB-Core-generic/LSB-Core- generic/iniscrptfunc.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#693688: The last patch to fix #691422 breaks other init scripts
Control: severity -1 serious Control: tags -1 +moreinfo Hi Klaus, and thanks for your bugreport, Le lundi, 19 novembre 2012 10.51:21, Klaus Ethgen a écrit : > The last patch to fix #691422 will break init scripts of unrelated > software like for example exim. Please roll it back. I set the severity > to critical for this reason; breaking unrelated software. As I can't verify your assertion here, using Wheezy's exim's initscript, and as: $ grep pidofproc /etc/init.d/exim4 if pidofproc -p "$QRPIDFILE" >/dev/null; then if pidofproc -p "$PIDFILE" >/dev/null; then Could you please detail your "will break init scripts of unrelated software" ? (tagging as +moreinfo) As discussed in #691422, pidofproc was never meant to be used with a different arguments order, so I think it's not an lsb-base responsibility if other init scripts wrongly using it now fail when it enforces a correct behaviour. For now, I'm downgrading this to serious. Cheers, OdyX -- OdyX -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#693688: The last patch to fix #691422 breaks other init scripts
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Package: lsb-base Version: 4.1+Debian9 Severity: critical The last patch to fix #691422 will break init scripts of unrelated software like for example exim. Please roll it back. I set the severity to critical for this reason; breaking unrelated software. - -- System Information: Debian Release: wheezy/sid APT prefers unstable APT policy: (800, 'unstable'), (700, 'stable'), (110, 'experimental') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Kernel: Linux 3.6.0 (SMP w/8 CPU cores; PREEMPT) Locale: LANG=de_DE, LC_CTYPE=de_DE (charmap=ISO-8859-1) (ignored: LC_ALL set to de_DE) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash - -- no debconf information - -- Klaus Ethgen http://www.ethgen.ch/ pub 4096R/4E20AF1C 2011-05-16 Klaus Ethgen Fingerprint: 85D4 CA42 952C 949B 1753 62B3 79D0 B06F 4E20 AF1C -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iQGcBAEBCgAGBQJQqgEXAAoJEKZ8CrGAGfasZN0MAIK/ZGinX+U/9fbC191HmovM V+kKZ37LMxJo1cS9R/kUNfZPRp+9ikteieMvyMgNlSoWEjPEKwfj/d0p/EHT2E5k vC8j6LY/yboPrly1VR2G+qBcGAS8pqIj9TxSG/202Y29cNdQdQ2H4VFRC1UpNaw+ LUtgCH4uczQ6G7rGOdz0cfUbeqsgVSLP3mgDYGe6UpfFbcsHKxw5kJgkfq7o1m/x FL9sCodw9e6kdmqg96a02wDfA9Fg0Sw372TFCu6cUbbPHagL/JyO0v3i33yYPj35 l7FbT1Hmsky/Q0tECuiIFSuiM2QlfMKZe9vm0MM4e8Ij9fkYr5G2yACvcl92+aKS sDV5oTUeaQmj5vm1BJ5gAISYKy/l/52vHhz1uqi+GRcwM9pt/oavgDPk2brt7mo4 4nHqbzXjiZStg7/FBCfz08Jtqycy2dwB5YyIcin6EWQtfEC7ILsWuzcos/YPDHjx l7sjk7o6oPFQnTKoZD/TzC+C//HRRNlwE6TRLzaeaQ== =ig8n -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
