On 10/07/2014 03:54 PM, Jerome Martin wrote:
On 10/07/2014 12:21 PM, Ritesh Raj Sarraf wrote:
On Tuesday 07 October 2014 03:49 PM, Ritesh Raj Sarraf wrote:
Okay!! Thanks to both of you. I will prepare something next week. My
only request is if (other) users can test it in time.
By the way,
On 17 Dec 2014, at 13:56, Ritesh Raj Sarraf r...@debian.org wrote:
On 10/07/2014 03:54 PM, Jerome Martin wrote:
On 10/07/2014 12:21 PM, Ritesh Raj Sarraf wrote:
On Tuesday 07 October 2014 03:49 PM, Ritesh Raj Sarraf wrote:
Okay!! Thanks to both of you. I will prepare something next
On 17 Dec 2014, at 21:11, Chris Boot bo...@bootc.net wrote:
On 17 Dec 2014, at 13:56, Ritesh Raj Sarraf r...@debian.org wrote:
On 10/07/2014 03:54 PM, Jerome Martin wrote:
On 10/07/2014 12:21 PM, Ritesh Raj Sarraf wrote:
On Tuesday 07 October 2014 03:49 PM, Ritesh Raj Sarraf wrote:
Thanks Chris,
I'll take a look at it in the coming days!
Best,
--
Jerome
On 12/17/2014 11:03 PM, Chris Boot wrote:
On 17 Dec 2014, at 21:11, Chris Boot bo...@bootc.net wrote:
On 17 Dec 2014, at 13:56, Ritesh Raj Sarraf r...@debian.org wrote:
On 10/07/2014 03:54 PM, Jerome Martin wrote:
Processing control commands:
severity -1 serious
Bug #764005 [targetcli] targetcli: Upgrade issues from 2.1-1
Severity set to 'serious' from 'important'
--
764005: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=764005
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processing control commands:
tag -1 help
Bug #764005 [targetcli] targetcli: Upgrade issues from 2.1-1
Added tag(s) help.
--
764005: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=764005
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
Control: tag -1 help
Right now I'm occupied with personal commitments. If anyone is willing
to help, please do. NMUs welcome too. If you'd like to co-maintain,
please send me a request on Alioth.
https://alioth.debian.org/projects/linux-target
There are 2 parts to this bug.
1. Upgrade issues. I
Control: severity -1 important
@Chris: Are you okay if I downgrade this? With severity grave it will be
a candidate for removal. I understand the data loss situation during
upgrades, but for users deploying it fresh, it is a non-issue.
Please reset to grave if you disagree. My intent is to
Processing control commands:
severity -1 important
Bug #764005 [targetcli] targetcli: Upgrade issues from 2.1-1
Severity set to 'important' from 'grave'
--
764005: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=764005
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Thanks for the bug report.
Jerome: How can we ensure to have the old 2.x settings / targets in 3.x ?
On Saturday 04 October 2014 11:00 PM, Chris Boot wrote:
Package: targetcli
Version: 3.0+git0.7e32595e-2
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable
Dear Maintainer,
The upgrade
On 10/05/2014 09:37 AM, Ritesh Raj Sarraf wrote:
Thanks for the bug report.
Jerome: How can we ensure to have the old 2.x settings / targets in 3.x ?
Manually, this is easy.
But to automate package upgrade is bit of a brain-twister.
I haven't found yet a good way to do it.
Basically, the
One more thought...
I think the Debian way would be to have a transition package containing
lio-utils, and modify the initscript to account for it.
The initscript would check on first start if we are in an upgrade
scenario (no new config, an old lio-utils config present), invoke the
Hi,
From my perspective, it would be nice to keep the old tcm_node and lio_node
tools around. I know that they are deprecated but there are a lot of tools
around that rely on them.
The migration from the lio-utils to targetcli startup scripts could possibly be
done by removing the init script
Package: targetcli
Version: 3.0+git0.7e32595e-2
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable
Dear Maintainer,
The upgrade from targetcli 2.1-1 removes all targets and makes targetcli
unusable.
1. Removing lio-utils disables/removes all targets from the kernel. This is a
serious
14 matches
Mail list logo
