Bug#691422: init-functions: order of arguments is not context-free

2012-11-13 Thread Didier 'OdyX' Raboud
Hi Arno, Le dimanche, 11 novembre 2012 13.01:41, Arno Töll a écrit : Relying on that broken behavior essentially means to trigger a bug, e.g. see #691365. If there are more such false uses of pidofproc, they should really be fixed - even in Wheezy. That said, the Release Team recently made

Bug#691422: init-functions: order of arguments is not context-free

2012-11-11 Thread Arno Töll
Hi, On 11/10/2012 05:16 PM, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote: I'll leave it up to Didier as to whether to apply it or just leave the bug wontfix. Yay, thanks! I have committed it to the packaging repository. Indeed, thanks! Now I am slightly relunctant to add it to wheezy, not sure it would

Bug#691422: init-functions: order of arguments is not context-free

2012-11-10 Thread Jeff Licquia
On 11/04/2012 12:02 PM, Arno Töll wrote: That said, I can live with you not wanting to fix it, but please give an error message at least, if you got an unexpected keyword argument after a positional if you do not intend to support it: I've attached a patch which will add some sanity checking

Bug#691422: init-functions: order of arguments is not context-free

2012-11-10 Thread Didier 'OdyX' Raboud
Control: tags -1 -wontfix +pending Le samedi, 10 novembre 2012 16.36:35, Jeff Licquia a écrit : I've attached a patch which will add some sanity checking to pidofproc's command-line argument parsing. With this patch, pidofproc will fail if it finds more than one non-dashed argument under any

Bug#691422: init-functions: order of arguments is not context-free

2012-11-10 Thread Jeff Licquia
On 11/10/2012 11:16 AM, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote: Now I am slightly relunctant to add it to wheezy, not sure it would warrant an unblock (although [0] shows no forecoming problem). This fix could potentially break existing initscripts (admittedly relying on that broken behaviour), so

Bug#691422: init-functions: order of arguments is not context-free

2012-11-04 Thread Didier 'OdyX' Raboud
Control: tags -1 +wontfix Le dimanche, 4 novembre 2012 01.36:53, Jeff Licquia a écrit : The LSB spec for pidofproc is here: https://refspecs.linuxfoundation.org/LSB_4.1.0/LSB-Core-generic/LSB-Core-ge neric/iniscrptfunc.html It defines the command line arguments for pidofproc as your

Bug#691422: init-functions: order of arguments is not context-free

2012-11-04 Thread Arno Töll
On 04.11.2012 13:21, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote: Same here; that makes two maintainers' opinions. :) Hereby tagging. Given GNU style option parsers allow this, and pretty much everyone emulates GNU behavior in our Linux centric world, this breaks user's expectations (well, it did for me :).

Bug#691422: init-functions: order of arguments is not context-free

2012-11-03 Thread Jeff Licquia
On 10/25/2012 09:53 AM, Arno Töll wrote: As spotted in #691365, it turns out that the pidofproc function provided in /lib/lsb/init-functions is not context free. Calling pidofproc $DAEMON -p $PIDFILE in contrast to pidofproc -p $PIDFILE $DAEMON yields different results if

Bug#691422: init-functions: order of arguments is not context-free

2012-10-25 Thread Arno Töll
Package: lsb-base Version: 4.1+Debian7 Severity: normal As spotted in #691365, it turns out that the pidofproc function provided in /lib/lsb/init-functions is not context free. Calling pidofproc $DAEMON -p $PIDFILE in contrast to pidofproc -p $PIDFILE $DAEMON yields different results