[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#766459: debootstrap: should not try to configure



Hi Santiago, All,

On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 13:39:06 +0100, Santiago Vila wrote:
[...]
> I already tried to fix this problem yesterday in base-files by making
> minor changes. It didn't work.
> 
> And it didn't work because contrary to what some people in this thread
> has suggested, this issue has *absolutely* nothing to do with recent changes
> in base-files. Most probably, this is what happened:
> 
> debootstrap in wheezy installs base-passwd and base-files in the same dpkg run.
> 
> The order in which base-files and base-passwd are configured is not
> defined in policy so it may depend on the dpkg version, which is
> almost like saying that it could be random.
> 
> At this moment dpkg in jessie and sid are quite different, so most likely:
> 
> dpkg in jessie happen to configure base-passwd first, and it works.
> dpkg in sid happen to configure base-files first, and it fails.
> 
> So I could be wrong, but this (recent changes in dpkg) is most likely
> the real reason this didn't bite us before.
> 

Yes, and I'm trying to confirm this right now. The diff between set-of-working
packages vs. set-of-failing packages is

5c5
< base-files_7.8_amd64.deb
---
> base-files_7.7_amd64.deb
21c21
< dpkg_1.17.20_amd64.deb
---
> dpkg_1.17.19_amd64.deb
56c56
< libc6_2.19-12_amd64.deb
---
> libc6_2.19-11_amd64.deb
59c59
< libc-bin_2.19-12_amd64.deb
---
> libc-bin_2.19-11_amd64.deb
61c61
< libcryptsetup4_2%3a1.6.6-3_amd64.deb
---
> libcryptsetup4_2%3a1.6.6-2_amd64.deb
132c132
< multiarch-support_2.19-12_amd64.deb
---
> multiarch-support_2.19-11_amd64.deb
159c159
< tzdata_2014i-1_all.deb
---
> tzdata_2014h-2_all.deb
162,163c162,163
< vim-common_2%3a7.4.488-1_amd64.deb
< vim-tiny_2%3a7.4.488-1_amd64.deb
---
> vim-common_2%3a7.4.481-1_amd64.deb
> vim-tiny_2%3a7.4.481-1_amd64.deb

but likely it all boils down to the changes in dpkg.

> 
> So please next time a simple "chown root:root" fails, let us not kill
> the messenger, ok? It has been quite disappointing to me to see so
> many fingers wrongly pointing at base-files, when base-files was never
> to blame for this.
>

As surely I was among the people pointing fingers I would like to apologise for
not having identified the right change causing those problems. I'm not yet sure
about the other absent dependency, but I'll do proper debugging before coming up
with further ideas.

Best,
Michael

Attachment: pgptPt8be3g0b.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: