Bug#849138: atop installation fails

2016-12-23 Thread Martin Steigerwald 
Am Freitag, 23. Dezember 2016, 20:50:29 CET schrieb Vincent Lefevre:
> On 2016-12-23 20:33:15 +0100, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> > I just downgraded to atop 1.26 and then upgraded to atop 2.26 twice.
> > It just worked. Anytime I downgraded to atop 1.26 there was no
> > /run/pacct_shadow.d present anymore. So it seems that on downgrading
> > from from atop 2.26 to 1.26 atopacctd was properly stopped as it
> > then removes its files and directories. (I didn´t check for the
> > presence of atopacctd process.)
> 
> But if atopacctd is killed with SIGKILL (the kernel can kill random
> processes like that), the reinstallation[*] no longer works.

Vincent, I do not say there isn´t an opportunity to improve the current 
situation. The bug is reported (again #842136, and Marc merged this your bug 
report with mine).

Yet it isn´t release critical. It is highly unlikely that the kernel would 
kill atop with SIGKILL in an OOM situation and it certainly doesn´t make the 
package unusable.

I also reported

> [*] apt install --reinstall atop/experimental

as Bug#849226 atop: reinstallation fails. Please add any additional 
information about reinstallation failure there in order to avoid using this 
bug report for several issues. Reinstallation on my system fails due to a 
*different* reason and with a different error message than than an existing /
run/pacct_shadow.d

Please relax, there is nothing that can´t still be fixed and there is nothing 
release critical in here.

Thanks,
-- 
Martin

Bug#849138: atop installation fails

2016-12-23 Thread Vincent Lefevre 
On 2016-12-23 20:33:15 +0100, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> I just downgraded to atop 1.26 and then upgraded to atop 2.26 twice.
> It just worked. Anytime I downgraded to atop 1.26 there was no
> /run/pacct_shadow.d present anymore. So it seems that on downgrading
> from from atop 2.26 to 1.26 atopacctd was properly stopped as it
> then removes its files and directories. (I didn´t check for the
> presence of atopacctd process.)

But if atopacctd is killed with SIGKILL (the kernel can kill random
processes like that), the reinstallation[*] no longer works.

[*] apt install --reinstall atop/experimental

-- 
Vincent Lefèvre  - Web: 
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: 
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)

Bug#849138: atop installation fails

2016-12-23 Thread Vincent Lefevre 
On 2016-12-23 20:10:23 +0100, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> Am Freitag, 23. Dezember 2016, 19:37:33 CET schrieb Vincent Lefevre:
> > This is not an inflated severity. Under no circumstances, the
> > installation of a package should make dpkg fail and leave the
> > packaging system in an inconsistent state (this can block the
> > correct installation of other packages). Well, actually here
> > the problem came from the old package from experimental, but
> > I wasn't aware of this.
> 
> The packaging system is not in an inconsistent state: You can always remove 
> the package that fails to upgrade. Or pin it to a certain version to prevent 
> an update.

No, I mean that is case of error, it may happen that other packages
in the upgrade do not get configured (I already got this problem),
and the user needs to fix this manually (e.g. dpkg --configure -a),
otherwise some part of the system may be broken.

> Yes. So to really test this:
> 
> - Downgrade to atop 1.26
> - Reboot, or make sure atopacctd is stopped and remove /run/pacct_shadow.d 
> directory.
> - Upgrade to 2.26.

After removing the /run/pacct_shadow.d directory, this works.

-- 
Vincent Lefèvre  - Web: 
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: 
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)

Bug#849138: atop installation fails

2016-12-23 Thread Martin Steigerwald 
Am Freitag, 23. Dezember 2016, 20:10:23 CET schrieb Martin Steigerwald:
> Am Freitag, 23. Dezember 2016, 19:37:33 CET schrieb Vincent Lefevre:
> > On 2016-12-23 12:10:09 +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
[…]
> > > I would appreciate if you could test that, by installing the version
> > > from unstable and the upgrading to the current version in
> > > experimental. That would _really_ help.
> > 
> > It still fails:
> > 
> > Preparing to unpack .../atop_2.2.6-1~exp1_amd64.deb ...
> > Unpacking atop (2.2.6-1~exp1) over (1.26-2+b1) ...
> 
> […]
> 
> > but it doesn't fail on a different machine. I suppose that the problem
> > comes from the fact that there hasn't been any clean-up after purging
> > the buggy atop version: I still have the /run/pacct_shadow.d directory
> > with old files:
> > 
> > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 2016-12-20 17:19:43 00.paf
> > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 7 2016-12-20 17:19:43 current
> 
> Yes. So to really test this:
> 
> - Downgrade to atop 1.26
> - Reboot, or make sure atopacctd is stopped and remove /run/pacct_shadow.d
> directory.
> - Upgrade to 2.26.
> 
> This should work okay every single time. Unless it doesn´t there is no
> release critical bug.

I just downgraded to atop 1.26 and then upgraded to atop 2.26 twice. It just 
worked. Anytime I downgraded to atop 1.26 there was no /run/pacct_shadow.d 
present anymore. So it seems that on downgrading from from atop 2.26 to 1.26 
atopacctd was properly stopped as it then removes its files and directories. (I 
didn´t check for the presence of atopacctd process.)

> > But I wonder whether this may still be a problem. I mean that if
> > atopacctd complains that some file exists, isn't this because it wants
> > to recreate such a file, in which case the problem could occur again?
> 
> I think there is. The one I already reported in bug #842136.
> 
> But it is not release-critical.
> 
> If you want to add some additional testing, you can try a reinstall of atop
> 2.26 oder 2.26. If that doesn´t work, there is still an issue with atopacctd
> not being able to be stopped gracefully. But I do think this is fixed.

I also did this, but this fails due to a different issue:

merkaba:~> LANG=C aptitude reinstall atop
The following packages will be REINSTALLED:
  atop 
0 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 1 reinstalled, 0 to remove and 1 not 
upgraded.
Need to get 0 B/142 kB of archives. After unpacking 0 B will be used.
(Reading database ... 581734 files and directories currently installed.)
Preparing to unpack .../atop_2.2.6-1~exp1_amd64.deb ...
Unpacking atop (2.2.6-1~exp1) over (2.2.6-1~exp1) ...
Setting up atop (2.2.6-1~exp1) ...
Failed to preset unit: File /etc/systemd/system/multi-user.target.wants/
atop.service already exists.
/usr/bin/deb-systemd-helper: error: systemctl preset failed on atop.service: 
No such file or directory
Processing triggers for systemd (232-8) ...
Processing triggers for man-db (2.7.6.1-2) ...
[…]

I will report this separately. And it isn´t an RC bug either.

Thanks,
-- 
Martin

Bug#849138: atop installation fails

2016-12-23 Thread Martin Steigerwald 
Am Freitag, 23. Dezember 2016, 19:37:33 CET schrieb Vincent Lefevre:
> On 2016-12-23 12:10:09 +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> > this is the second time this week that you're filing a duplicate of an
> > already existing bug with a severely inflated severity.
> 
> This is not an inflated severity. Under no circumstances, the
> installation of a package should make dpkg fail and leave the
> packaging system in an inconsistent state (this can block the
> correct installation of other packages). Well, actually here
> the problem came from the old package from experimental, but
> I wasn't aware of this.

The packaging system is not in an inconsistent state: You can always remove 
the package that fails to upgrade. Or pin it to a certain version to prevent 
an update.

As someone who uses Debian Sid and experimental I expect you to be aware of 
it.

> > While I appreciate your attention on atop, I would really love if
> > you could look whether the issue you're reporting already exists.
> 
> I was looking at RC bugs.

Which is, as I still think, not the right severity for this bug. Anyhow its 
always a good idea to look for bugs of all kinds of severity, as: The 
judgement of someone on severity else may be different than yours.

> > This being said, I do agree that #842136 is an issue that we should
> > look into, but I don't think it's a release stopper. The issue is
> > related to a bug in the version of atop being replaced, that has been
> > addressed with atop 2.2.5. I do doubt that this would happen when
> > you're upgrading from the ancient version that is currently in unstable.
> > 
> > I would appreciate if you could test that, by installing the version
> > from unstable and the upgrading to the current version in
> > experimental. That would _really_ help.
> 
> It still fails:
> 
> Preparing to unpack .../atop_2.2.6-1~exp1_amd64.deb ...
> Unpacking atop (2.2.6-1~exp1) over (1.26-2+b1) ...
[…]
> but it doesn't fail on a different machine. I suppose that the problem
> comes from the fact that there hasn't been any clean-up after purging
> the buggy atop version: I still have the /run/pacct_shadow.d directory
> with old files:
> 
> -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 2016-12-20 17:19:43 00.paf
> -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 7 2016-12-20 17:19:43 current

Yes. So to really test this:

- Downgrade to atop 1.26
- Reboot, or make sure atopacctd is stopped and remove /run/pacct_shadow.d 
directory.
- Upgrade to 2.26.

This should work okay every single time. Unless it doesn´t there is no release 
critical bug.

> But I wonder whether this may still be a problem. I mean that if
> atopacctd complains that some file exists, isn't this because it wants
> to recreate such a file, in which case the problem could occur again?

I think there is. The one I already reported in bug #842136.

But it is not release-critical.

If you want to add some additional testing, you can try a reinstall of atop 
2.26 oder 2.26. If that doesn´t work, there is still an issue with atopacctd 
not being able to be stopped gracefully. But I do think this is fixed.

Or or so, it would be nice if the start unit could clean the directory in case 
it would still exist, to cover rare corner cases where it might still exist.

Now please relax and first have a merry christmas, before panicking about this 
issue again.

Thank you,
-- 
Martin

Bug#849138: atop installation fails

2016-12-23 Thread Vincent Lefevre 
On 2016-12-23 12:10:09 +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> this is the second time this week that you're filing a duplicate of an
> already existing bug with a severely inflated severity.

This is not an inflated severity. Under no circumstances, the
installation of a package should make dpkg fail and leave the
packaging system in an inconsistent state (this can block the
correct installation of other packages). Well, actually here
the problem came from the old package from experimental, but
I wasn't aware of this.

> While I appreciate your attention on atop, I would really love if
> you could look whether the issue you're reporting already exists.

I was looking at RC bugs.

> This being said, I do agree that #842136 is an issue that we should
> look into, but I don't think it's a release stopper. The issue is
> related to a bug in the version of atop being replaced, that has been
> addressed with atop 2.2.5. I do doubt that this would happen when
> you're upgrading from the ancient version that is currently in unstable.
> 
> I would appreciate if you could test that, by installing the version
> from unstable and the upgrading to the current version in
> experimental. That would _really_ help.

It still fails:

Preparing to unpack .../atop_2.2.6-1~exp1_amd64.deb ...
Unpacking atop (2.2.6-1~exp1) over (1.26-2+b1) ...
Setting up atop (2.2.6-1~exp1) ...
Installing new version of config file /etc/cron.d/atop ...
Installing new version of config file /etc/default/atop ...
Installing new version of config file /etc/init.d/atop ...
Created symlink /etc/systemd/system/multi-user.target.wants/atop.service → 
/lib/systemd/system/atop.service.
Created symlink /etc/systemd/system/multi-user.target.wants/atopacct.service → 
/lib/systemd/system/atopacct.service.
Job for atopacct.service failed because of unavailable resources or another 
system error.
See "systemctl status atopacct.service" and "journalctl -xe" for details.
invoke-rc.d: initscript atopacct, action "start" failed.
● atopacct.service - Atop process accounting daemon
   Loaded: loaded (/lib/systemd/system/atopacct.service; enabled; vendor 
preset: enabled)
   Active: failed (Result: resources) since Fri 2016-12-23 19:24:44 CET; 10ms 
ago
 Docs: man:atopacctd(8)
  Process: 2445 ExecStart=/usr/sbin/atopacctd (code=exited, status=0/SUCCESS)
 Main PID: 619 (code=killed, signal=KILL)

Dec 23 19:24:44 cventin systemd[1]: Starting Atop process accounting daemon...
Dec 23 19:24:44 cventin atopacctd[2445]: /run/pacct_shadow.d: File exists
Dec 23 19:24:44 cventin systemd[1]: atopacct.service: PID file /run/atopacc…tory
Dec 23 19:24:44 cventin systemd[1]: Failed to start Atop process accounting…mon.
Dec 23 19:24:44 cventin systemd[1]: atopacct.service: Unit entered failed state.
Dec 23 19:24:44 cventin systemd[1]: atopacct.service: Failed with result 'r…es'.
Hint: Some lines were ellipsized, use -l to show in full.
dpkg: error processing package atop (--configure):
 subprocess installed post-installation script returned error exit status 1
Processing triggers for systemd (232-8) ...
Processing triggers for man-db (2.7.6.1-2) ...
Errors were encountered while processing:
 atop

but it doesn't fail on a different machine. I suppose that the problem
comes from the fact that there hasn't been any clean-up after purging
the buggy atop version: I still have the /run/pacct_shadow.d directory
with old files:

-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 2016-12-20 17:19:43 00.paf
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 7 2016-12-20 17:19:43 current

But I wonder whether this may still be a problem. I mean that if
atopacctd complains that some file exists, isn't this because it wants
to recreate such a file, in which case the problem could occur again?

-- 
Vincent Lefèvre  - Web: 
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: 
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)

Bug#849138: atop installation fails

2016-12-23 Thread Marc Haber 
severity #849138 normal
merge #849138 #842136
thanks

Hi Vincent,

this is the second time this week that you're filing a duplicate of an
already existing bug with a severely inflated severity. While I
appreciate your attention on atop, I would really love if you could
look whether the issue you're reporting already exists.

This being said, I do agree that #842136 is an issue that we should
look into, but I don't think it's a release stopper. The issue is
related to a bug in the version of atop being replaced, that has been
addressed with atop 2.2.5. I do doubt that this would happen when
you're upgrading from the ancient version that is currently in unstable.

I would appreciate if you could test that, by installing the version
from unstable and the upgrading to the current version in
experimental. That would _really_ help.

Geetings
Marc


On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 10:39:28PM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> From: Vincent Lefevre <vinc...@vinc17.net>
> Subject: Bug#849138: atop installation fails
> To: Debian Bug Tracking System <sub...@bugs.debian.org>
> Reply-To: Vincent Lefevre <vinc...@vinc17.net>, 849...@bugs.debian.org
> Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2016 22:39:28 +0100
> X-Debian-PR-Package: atop
> X-Mailer-Info: https://www.vinc17.net/mutt/
> User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.1-6878-vl-r94147 (2016-11-29)
> 
> Package: atop
> Version: 2.2.6-1~exp1
> Severity: grave
> Justification: renders package unusable
> 
> # apt install atop/experimental
> Reading package lists... Done
> Building dependency tree   
> Reading state information... Done
> Selected version '2.2.6-1~exp1' (Debian:experimental [amd64]) for 'atop'
> The following packages were automatically installed and are no longer 
> required:
> [...]
> The following packages will be upgraded:
>   atop
> 1 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 51 not upgraded.
> Need to get 142 kB of archives.
> After this operation, 7168 B of additional disk space will be used.
> Get:1 http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian experimental/main amd64 atop amd64 
> 2.2.6-1~exp1 [142 kB]
> Fetched 142 kB in 0s (1082 kB/s)
> Retrieving bug reports... Done
> Parsing Found/Fixed information... Done
> Retrieving bug reports... Done
> Parsing Found/Fixed information... Done
> Reading changelogs... Done
> apt-listchanges: Do you want to continue? [Y/n] 
> (Reading database ... 505551 files and directories currently installed.)
> Preparing to unpack .../atop_2.2.6-1~exp1_amd64.deb ...
> Unpacking atop (2.2.6-1~exp1) over (2.2.4-1~exp1) ...
> Setting up atop (2.2.6-1~exp1) ...
> Installing new version of config file /etc/cron.d/atop ...
> Installing new version of config file /etc/logrotate.d/psaccs_atop ...
> Installing new version of config file /etc/logrotate.d/psaccu_atop ...
> Job for atopacct.service failed because of unavailable resources or another 
> system error.
> See "systemctl status atopacct.service" and "journalctl -xe" for details.
> invoke-rc.d: initscript atopacct, action "start" failed.
> ● atopacct.service - Atop process accounting daemon
>Loaded: loaded (/lib/systemd/system/atopacct.service; enabled; vendor 
> preset: enabled)
>Active: failed (Result: resources) since Thu 2016-12-22 22:35:09 CET; 8ms 
> ago
>  Docs: man:atopacctd(8)
>   Process: 24056 ExecStart=/usr/sbin/atopacctd (code=exited, status=0/SUCCESS)
>  Main PID: 619 (code=killed, signal=KILL)
> 
> Dec 22 22:35:09 cventin systemd[1]: Starting Atop process accounting daemon...
> Dec 22 22:35:09 cventin atopacctd[24056]: /run/pacct_shadow.d: File exists
> Dec 22 22:35:09 cventin systemd[1]: atopacct.service: PID file 
> /run/atopacc…tory
> Dec 22 22:35:09 cventin systemd[1]: Failed to start Atop process 
> accounting…mon.
> Dec 22 22:35:09 cventin systemd[1]: atopacct.service: Unit entered failed 
> state.
> Dec 22 22:35:09 cventin systemd[1]: atopacct.service: Failed with result 
> 'r…es'.
> Hint: Some lines were ellipsized, use -l to show in full.
> dpkg: error processing package atop (--configure):
>  subprocess installed post-installation script returned error exit status 1
> Processing triggers for systemd (232-8) ...
> Processing triggers for man-db (2.7.6.1-2) ...
> Errors were encountered while processing:
>  atop
> 
> Details about the error:
> 
> Dec 22 22:35:09 cventin systemd[1]: Starting Atop process accounting daemon...
> -- Subject: Unit atopacct.service has begun start-up
> -- Defined-By: systemd
> -- Support: https://www.debian.org/support
> -- 
> -- Unit atopacct.service has begun starting up.
> Dec 22 22:35:09 cventin atopacctd[24056]: /run/pacct_shadow.d: File exists
> Dec 22 22:35:09 cventin systemd[1]: atopacct.service: PID file 
> /run/atopacctd.pid not readable (yet?) after st

Bug#849138: atop installation fails, like meanwhile fixed upstream issue

2016-12-23 Thread Martin Steigerwald 
Dear Vincent,

thank you for your report.

Please check whether atopacctd is still running?

You are upgrading from version 2.24 which had a bug in atopacctd that left it 
hanging around and only killable by SIGKILL.

The message "/run/pacct_shadow.d: File exists" hints at a still running 
atopacctd. This has been an upstream issue, which is fixed in atop 2.25 I 
think. I upgraded from atop 2.25 to 2.26 without any issue. Since for Jessie 
=> Stretch the upgrade will be between 1.26-2 and 2.26, I do not expect this 
issue to happen.

Additionally I do not agree with the severity of grave for this bug report. 
The package is definately usable. However I leave it to Marc, the maintainer of 
the atop package, to downgrade the severity to what he sees fits.

Thanks,
-- 
Martin

Bug#849138: atop installation fails

2016-12-22 Thread Vincent Lefevre 
Package: atop
Version: 2.2.6-1~exp1
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable

# apt install atop/experimental
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree   
Reading state information... Done
Selected version '2.2.6-1~exp1' (Debian:experimental [amd64]) for 'atop'
The following packages were automatically installed and are no longer required:
[...]
The following packages will be upgraded:
  atop
1 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 51 not upgraded.
Need to get 142 kB of archives.
After this operation, 7168 B of additional disk space will be used.
Get:1 http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian experimental/main amd64 atop amd64 
2.2.6-1~exp1 [142 kB]
Fetched 142 kB in 0s (1082 kB/s)
Retrieving bug reports... Done
Parsing Found/Fixed information... Done
Retrieving bug reports... Done
Parsing Found/Fixed information... Done
Reading changelogs... Done
apt-listchanges: Do you want to continue? [Y/n] 
(Reading database ... 505551 files and directories currently installed.)
Preparing to unpack .../atop_2.2.6-1~exp1_amd64.deb ...
Unpacking atop (2.2.6-1~exp1) over (2.2.4-1~exp1) ...
Setting up atop (2.2.6-1~exp1) ...
Installing new version of config file /etc/cron.d/atop ...
Installing new version of config file /etc/logrotate.d/psaccs_atop ...
Installing new version of config file /etc/logrotate.d/psaccu_atop ...
Job for atopacct.service failed because of unavailable resources or another 
system error.
See "systemctl status atopacct.service" and "journalctl -xe" for details.
invoke-rc.d: initscript atopacct, action "start" failed.
● atopacct.service - Atop process accounting daemon
   Loaded: loaded (/lib/systemd/system/atopacct.service; enabled; vendor 
preset: enabled)
   Active: failed (Result: resources) since Thu 2016-12-22 22:35:09 CET; 8ms ago
 Docs: man:atopacctd(8)
  Process: 24056 ExecStart=/usr/sbin/atopacctd (code=exited, status=0/SUCCESS)
 Main PID: 619 (code=killed, signal=KILL)

Dec 22 22:35:09 cventin systemd[1]: Starting Atop process accounting daemon...
Dec 22 22:35:09 cventin atopacctd[24056]: /run/pacct_shadow.d: File exists
Dec 22 22:35:09 cventin systemd[1]: atopacct.service: PID file /run/atopacc…tory
Dec 22 22:35:09 cventin systemd[1]: Failed to start Atop process accounting…mon.
Dec 22 22:35:09 cventin systemd[1]: atopacct.service: Unit entered failed state.
Dec 22 22:35:09 cventin systemd[1]: atopacct.service: Failed with result 'r…es'.
Hint: Some lines were ellipsized, use -l to show in full.
dpkg: error processing package atop (--configure):
 subprocess installed post-installation script returned error exit status 1
Processing triggers for systemd (232-8) ...
Processing triggers for man-db (2.7.6.1-2) ...
Errors were encountered while processing:
 atop

Details about the error:

Dec 22 22:35:09 cventin systemd[1]: Starting Atop process accounting daemon...
-- Subject: Unit atopacct.service has begun start-up
-- Defined-By: systemd
-- Support: https://www.debian.org/support
-- 
-- Unit atopacct.service has begun starting up.
Dec 22 22:35:09 cventin atopacctd[24056]: /run/pacct_shadow.d: File exists
Dec 22 22:35:09 cventin systemd[1]: atopacct.service: PID file 
/run/atopacctd.pid not readable (yet?) after start: No such file or directory
Dec 22 22:35:09 cventin systemd[1]: Failed to start Atop process accounting 
daemon.
-- Subject: Unit atopacct.service has failed
-- Defined-By: systemd
-- Support: https://www.debian.org/support
-- 
-- Unit atopacct.service has failed.
-- 
-- The result is failed.
Dec 22 22:35:09 cventin systemd[1]: atopacct.service: Unit entered failed state.
Dec 22 22:35:09 cventin systemd[1]: atopacct.service: Failed with result 
'resources'.

-- System Information:
Debian Release: stretch/sid
  APT prefers unstable-debug
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable-debug'), (500, 'stable-updates'), (500, 
'unstable'), (500, 'testing'), (500, 'stable'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Foreign Architectures: i386

Kernel: Linux 4.8.0-2-amd64 (SMP w/12 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=POSIX, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)

Versions of packages atop depends on:
ii  init-system-helpers  1.46
ii  initscripts  2.88dsf-59.8
ii  libc62.24-8
ii  libncurses5  6.0+20161126-1
ii  libtinfo56.0+20161126-1
ii  lsb-base 9.20161125
ii  zlib1g   1:1.2.8.dfsg-4

Versions of packages atop recommends:
ii  cron [cron-daemon]  3.0pl1-128

atop suggests no packages.

-- no debconf information