Resending with a more obvious subject. The workaround I describe in the final paragraph does seem to work, but I'm not sure that's the best way to go.
On Mon, 2015-05-04 at 15:31 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote: > (CC initramfs-tools@packages, context is flash-kernel invocation not > being deferred via triggers during upgrade and ultimately running > several times in a dist-upgrade) > > On Sat, 2015-04-04 at 10:49 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote: > > At first glance it seems like invocations via the initramfs-tools hooks > > are not being deferred. > > This is because initramfs-tools.postinst contains: > # Regenerate initramfs whenever we go to dpkg state `installed' > if [ "x$1" != xtriggered ]; then > # this activates the trigger, if triggers are working > update-initramfs -u > else > # force it to actually happen > DPKG_MAINTSCRIPT_PACKAGE='' update-initramfs -u > fi > > and flash-kernel uses [ -n "$DPKG_MAINTSCRIPT_PACKAGE" ] when deciding > to defer to a trigger. So the invocations of flash-kernel > via /etc/initramfs/post-update.d/flash-kernel end up never being > deferred. > > I don't think initramfs-tools is wrong to do this per-se, but it does > mean that anything hooked off the post-update.d hooks cannot reliably > use triggers (dpkg-trigger uses $DPKG_MAINTSCRIPT_PACKAGE itself). > > flash-kernel itself does something similar, but instead of manipulating > DPKG_MAINTSCRIPT_PACKAGE it instead sets FLASH_KERNEL_NOTRIGGER=1 and > keys off that. > > It seems like the best solution would a patch to switch initramfs-tools > to a similar scheme, would such a patch be accepted? > > If not then I will arrange for /etc/initramfs/post-update.d/flash-kernel > to signal to f-k somehow that triggers should be used despite the lack > of DPKG_MAINTSCRIPT_PACKAGE. > > Ian. > > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
