On Tue, Mar 27, 2007 at 01:09:05AM +0200, Robert Millan wrote: > Package: upgrade-reports > Severity: normal
> <quote> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ sudo aptitude unmarkauto openoffice.org vim > $(dpkg-query -W 'kernel-image-2.6*' | cut -f1) > [...] > The following packages are unused and will be REMOVED: > apache2 defoma fontconfig libfontconfig1 ttf-bitstream-vera > 0 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 5 to remove and 0 not upgraded. > [...] > Purging category type1.. > fc-cache: error while loading shared libraries: libfontconfig.so.1: cannot > open shared object file: No such file or directory > Removing ttf-bitstream-vera ... > </quote> > Any particular reason for removing apache2 ? Because that's what the aptitude state for these packages said should be done? Note that aptitude says the packages are *unused* and will be removed; except for bug #411123, this can only be a result of an admin's decisions, so I don't see that there's anything that needs to be documented here? > As for the fc-cache error, looks quite ugly although unimportant. Should I > file a bug on its owner, asking to move the adequate bits from postrm to > prerm ? No, that's a bug in the old version of the package, the etch version of the package doesn't have this error. > <quote> > Configuration file `/etc/hotplug.d/default/default.hotplug' > ==> Modified (by you or by a script) since installation. > ==> Package distributor has shipped an updated version. > What would you like to do about it ? Your options are: > Y or I : install the package maintainer's version > N or O : keep your currently-installed version > D : show the differences between the versions > Z : background this process to examine the situation > The default action is to keep your current version. > *** default.hotplug (Y/I/N/O/D/Z) [default=N] ? y > </quote> > This makes no sense. That file didn't even exist in my system before the > update (I checked yesterday's backup). which means that a conffile belonging to the hotplug package had been removed locally from your system -- this conffile prompt is correct in such a case. > <quote> > The following NEW packages will be installed: > analog apache2-doc apache2.2-common at bin86 bind9 bind9-doc bison > ca-certificates cpp-4.1 dc debian-archive-keyring dhcp-client discover1 > discover1-data dlint dmidecode doc-debian doc-linux-text eject fdutils > flex ftp g++ g++-3.3 g++-4.1 gcc-4.1 gcc-4.1-base gnu-efi gpgv iamerican > ibritish iptables iputils-ping ispell laptop-detect libapache2-mod-perl2 > libapache2-mod-python libapr1 libaprutil1 libarchive-tar-perl libbind9-0 > libc-client2002edebian libcompress-zlib-perl libdb4.4 libdbd-pg-perl > libdbi-perl libdevel-symdump-perl libdiscover1 libdns22 libedit2 > libevent1 libfribidi0 libgc1c2 libgnutls13 libgssapi2 libhtml-parser-perl > libhtml-tagset-perl libhtml-tree-perl libident libio-zlib-perl libisc11 > libisccc0 libisccfg1 liblockfile1 libltdl3 liblwres9 libmailutils1 > libmudflap0 libmudflap0-dev libmysqlclient15off libnet-daemon-perl > libnewt0.52 libnfsidmap2 libnss-db libpcap0.7 libpci2 libpg-perl > libplrpc-perl libpq4 librpcsecgss3 libsasl2-2 libsasl2-modules > libsigc++-2.0-0c2a libslang2 libsocket6-perl libsqlite3-0 libssl0.9.8 > libssp0 libstdc++5-3.3-dev libstdc++6 libstdc++6-4.1-dev libtasn1-3 > libwww-perl libxml2 lpr lsof lwresd m4 mailagent manpages manpages-dev > mawk mdetect mktemp mlock mpack mtools mysql-common ncurses-term > nfs-common nvi openbsd-inetd openssh-client openssh-server pidentd > portmap postgresql postgresql-7.4 postgresql-client-7.4 > postgresql-client-common postgresql-common postgresql-contrib > postgresql-contrib-7.4 postgresql-doc postgresql-doc-7.4 ppp pppconfig > pppoe pppoeconf python-central python-minimal python-newt python-support > python2.4-minimal rcs read-edid readline-common sharutils spamassassin > spamc sysvinit-utils tasksel tasksel-data tcsh telnet texinfo time > traceroute update-inetd uw-imapd > </quote> > This is overbroad. In particular, I have no use for postgresql, ppp, > spamassassin or uw-imapd. > It seems that for some reason tasksel decided that I want web, dns, and > mail tasks (that's what it displays post-upgrade). OTOH, before upgrade > tasksel wasn't even installed. When installing and running it in my > backup copy, web and mail tasks (but NOT dns) were enabled (I've never > enabled them, although this could well have been done during install > -it's a colo-). This is from aptitude dist-upgrade, right? I don't believe that honors task settings; more likely these are the results of recommends? Do these same packages show up if you run aptitude --without-recommends dist-upgrade? (I don't think that would be a reasonable suggestion to put in the release notes in any case, an expert user who knows what they want can always remove packages after the fact or come to --without-recommends or apt-get on their own, but it would be good to know the precise reason for these unwanted additions.) I certainly don't believe that tasksel is going to have chosen tasks for you automatically, so those must have been selected manually at some point -- so colo setup seems reasonably likely. > <quote> > Preparing to replace ucf 1.17 (using .../archives/ucf_2.0020_all.deb) ... > Unpacking replacement ucf ... > dpkg: apache2-common: dependency problems, but removing anyway as you request: > apache2-mpm-prefork depends on apache2-common (= 2.0.54-5sarge1); however: > Package apache2-common is to be removed. > (Reading database ... 22793 files and directories currently installed.) > Removing apache2-common ... > Stopping web server: Apache2. > (Reading database ... 22420 files and directories currently installed.) > Preparing to replace apache2-mpm-prefork 2.0.54-5sarge1 (using > .../apache2-mpm-prefork_2.2.3-3.3_i386.deb) ... > Stopping web server: Apache2 ... failed! > You may still have some apache2 processes running. There are > processes named 'apache2' which do not match your pid file, > and in the name of safety, we've left them alone. Please review > the situation by hand. > . > Stopping web server: Apache2 ... failed! > You may still have some apache2 processes running. There are > processes named 'apache2' which do not match your pid file, > and in the name of safety, we've left them alone. Please review > the situation by hand. > </quote> > That was a bit scary (as in service being interrupted during the whole > upgrade). If it's harmless, I think it should be documented. I wouldn't say it's harmless; it has been reported separately as bug #416231. > <quote> > Setting up qpopper (4.0.5.dfsg-0.1) ... > --------- IMPORTANT INFORMATION FOR XINETD USERS ---------- > The following line will be added to your /etc/inetd.conf file: > pop-3\t\tstream\ttcp\tnowait\troot\t/usr/sbin/tcpd\t/usr/sbin/in.qpopper -f > /etc/qpopper.conf > If you are indeed using xinetd, you will have to convert the > above into /etc/xinetd.conf format, and add it manually. See > /usr/share/doc/xinetd/README.Debian for more information. > ----------------------------------------------------------- > </quote> > I had a bunch of similar warnings. It's a bit confusing since I already > had setup the pop3 line in xinetd before upgrade, and no change was in > fact needed. Not going to be fixed for etch, certainly. The need for an update-inetd implementation for xinetd is well-known, and not conceivable to solve for etch. Thanks, -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
