Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.debian.bugs.dist > #1020186 > unrolled thread

Bug#966816: /lib/systemd/system/blk-availability.service:10: Neither a valid executable name nor an absolute path: ${exec_prefix}/bin/true

Started byMichael Biebl <biebl@debian.org>
First post2020-08-02 20:10 +0200
Last post2020-08-13 16:30 +0200
Articles 8 — 5 participants

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.bugs.dist


Contents

  Bug#966816: /lib/systemd/system/blk-availability.service:10: Neither a valid executable name nor an absolute path: ${exec_prefix}/bin/true Michael Biebl <biebl@debian.org> - 2020-08-02 20:10 +0200
    Bug#966816: /lib/systemd/system/blk-availability.service:10: Neither a valid executable name nor an absolute path: ${exec_prefix}/bin/true Awtul <awtulawtul@gmail.com> - 2020-08-06 08:40 +0200
    Bug#966816: lvm2: Patch to fix the problem Asher Gordon <AsDaGo@posteo.net> - 2020-08-07 06:10 +0200
      Bug#966816: lvm2: Patch to fix the problem Asher Gordon <AsDaGo@posteo.net> - 2020-08-07 19:30 +0200
      Bug#966816: lvm2: Patch to fix the problem Michael Biebl <biebl@debian.org> - 2020-08-08 11:40 +0200
        Bug#966816: lvm2: Patch to fix the problem Asher Gordon <AsDaGo@posteo.net> - 2020-08-08 20:40 +0200
    Bug#966816: /lib/systemd/system/blk-availability.service:10: Neither a valid executable name nor an absolute path: ${exec_prefix}/bin/true Jonathan Marsaud <jonathanmarsaud@gmail.com> - 2020-08-13 11:30 +0200
    Bug#966816: /lib/systemd/system/blk-availability.service:10: Neither a valid executable name nor an absolute path: ${exec_prefix}/bin/true Tom Overlund <tomov@dilacero.org> - 2020-08-13 16:30 +0200

#1020186 — Bug#966816: /lib/systemd/system/blk-availability.service:10: Neither a valid executable name nor an absolute path: ${exec_prefix}/bin/true

FromMichael Biebl <biebl@debian.org>
Date2020-08-02 20:10 +0200
SubjectBug#966816: /lib/systemd/system/blk-availability.service:10: Neither a valid executable name nor an absolute path: ${exec_prefix}/bin/true
Message-ID<AzqAN-NT-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
Package: lvm2
Version: 2.03.09-2
Severity: important
File: /lib/systemd/system/blk-availability.service

$ systemctl cat blk-availability.service
# /lib/systemd/system/blk-availability.service
[Unit]
Description=Availability of block devices
Before=shutdown.target
After=lvm2-activation.service iscsi-shutdown.service iscsi.service iscsid.service fcoe.service rbdmap.service
DefaultDependencies=no
Conflicts=shutdown.target

[Service]
Type=oneshot
ExecStart=${exec_prefix}/bin/true
ExecStop=/sbin/blkdeactivate -u -l wholevg -m disablequeueing -r wait
RemainAfterExit=yes

[Install]
WantedBy=sysinit.target



ExecStart=${exec_prefix}/bin/true → This is obviously wrong.

Instead of fixing the path again ( I see there have been bugs in
that regard in the past already), you might consider dropping the
ExecStart= altogether. For Type=oneshot services, ExecStart= does not
need to be set.

When stopping the service, I also noticed
Aug 02 19:54:05 pluto blkdeactivate[42210]: /sbin/blkdeactivate: Zeile 345: /bin/sort: No such file or directory



-- System Information:
Debian Release: bullseye/sid
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (200, 'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)

Kernel: Linux 5.7.0-2-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU threads)
Kernel taint flags: TAINT_FIRMWARE_WORKAROUND, TAINT_OOT_MODULE, TAINT_UNSIGNED_MODULE
Locale: LANG=de_DE.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=de_DE.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8), LANGUAGE not set
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)
LSM: AppArmor: enabled

Versions of packages lvm2 depends on:
ii  dmeventd                  2:1.02.171-2
ii  dmsetup                   2:1.02.171-2
ii  init-system-helpers       1.58
ii  libaio1                   0.3.112-8
ii  libblkid1                 2.36-2
ii  libc6                     2.31-2
ii  libdevmapper-event1.02.1  2:1.02.171-2
ii  libreadline5              5.2+dfsg-3+b13
ii  libselinux1               3.1-2
ii  libsystemd0               246-1
ii  libudev1                  246-1
ii  lsb-base                  11.1.0

Versions of packages lvm2 recommends:
ii  thin-provisioning-tools  0.8.5-4

lvm2 suggests no packages.

-- no debconf information

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]


#1020732

FromAwtul <awtulawtul@gmail.com>
Date2020-08-06 08:40 +0200
Message-ID<AAHJg-72I-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1020186
Package: lvm2
Version: 2.03.09-2
Followup-For: Bug #966816

I confirm the bug.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1020841 — Bug#966816: lvm2: Patch to fix the problem

FromAsher Gordon <AsDaGo@posteo.net>
Date2020-08-07 06:10 +0200
SubjectBug#966816: lvm2: Patch to fix the problem
Message-ID<AB1RD-2A0-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1020186

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Package: lvm2
Version: 2.03.09-2
Followup-For: Bug #966816

Dear Maintainer,

I noticed this bug as well, when I was upgrading lvm2. Here is a patch
to fix the problem:

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1020912 — Bug#966816: lvm2: Patch to fix the problem

FromAsher Gordon <AsDaGo@posteo.net>
Date2020-08-07 19:30 +0200
SubjectBug#966816: lvm2: Patch to fix the problem
Message-ID<ABelQ-1Fq-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1020841

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Asher Gordon <AsDaGo@posteo.net> writes:

> It seems that this problem was present for quite a while, so I'm not
> sure why I didn't notice it before.

Ah, it's because the bug only came up after the new release
(2.03.09-2). The bug lay dormant in 2.03.09-1. That's because
'--bindir=/bin' was removed from debian/rules in commit 5df1ae4 in order
to fix #929437. (That commit was between debian/2.03.09-1 and
debian/2.03.09-2.)

So that's why I didn't notice it before.

Thanks,
Asher

-- 
If you stand on your head, you will get footprints in your hair.
                               --------
I prefer to send and receive mail encrypted. Please send me your
public key, and if you do not have my public key, please let me
know. Thanks.

GPG fingerprint: 38F3 975C D173 4037 B397  8095 D4C9 C4FC 5460 8E68

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1020965 — Bug#966816: lvm2: Patch to fix the problem

FromMichael Biebl <biebl@debian.org>
Date2020-08-08 11:40 +0200
SubjectBug#966816: lvm2: Patch to fix the problem
Message-ID<ABtuy-2qG-23@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1020841

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Thu, 06 Aug 2020 23:59:54 -0400 Asher Gordon <AsDaGo@posteo.net> wrote:
> Package: lvm2
> Version: 2.03.09-2
> Followup-For: Bug #966816
> 
> Dear Maintainer,
> 
> I noticed this bug as well, when I was upgrading lvm2. Here is a patch
> to fix the problem:

As said in the initial message: a better fix is to simply drop that
ExecStart= line altogether. It's not necessary (anymore) for
Type=oneshot services.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1021005 — Bug#966816: lvm2: Patch to fix the problem

FromAsher Gordon <AsDaGo@posteo.net>
Date2020-08-08 20:40 +0200
SubjectBug#966816: lvm2: Patch to fix the problem
Message-ID<ABBV7-7vD-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1020965

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Michael Biebl <biebl@debian.org> writes:

> As said in the initial message: a better fix is to simply drop that
> ExecStart= line altogether. It's not necessary (anymore) for
> Type=oneshot services.

Sorry, I missed that. Well although it is trivial, here is a patch to
justify the patch tag I added: ;-)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1021433

FromJonathan Marsaud <jonathanmarsaud@gmail.com>
Date2020-08-13 11:30 +0200
Message-ID<ADhIB-3p9-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1020186
Package: lvm2
Version: 2.03.09-2
Followup-For: Bug #966816
X-Debbugs-Cc: jonathanmarsaud@gmail.com

Dear Maintainer,

I can confirm this bug too. The solution to simply remove the "ExecStart" line as this unit is type "oneshot" seems to be the best
according to the version of systemd (in old systemd version, the ExecStart was needed even for oneshot type).

Regards,

-- System Information:
Debian Release: bullseye/sid
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)

Kernel: Linux 5.7.0-2-amd64 (SMP w/8 CPU threads)
Locale: LANG=fr_FR.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=fr_FR.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8), LANGUAGE not set
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /usr/bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)
LSM: AppArmor: enabled

Versions of packages lvm2 depends on:
ii  dmeventd                  2:1.02.171-2
ii  dmsetup                   2:1.02.171-2
ii  init-system-helpers       1.58
ii  libaio1                   0.3.112-8
ii  libblkid1                 2.36-2
ii  libc6                     2.31-3
ii  libdevmapper-event1.02.1  2:1.02.171-2
ii  libreadline5              5.2+dfsg-3+b13
ii  libselinux1               3.1-2
ii  libsystemd0               246-2
ii  libudev1                  246-2
ii  lsb-base                  11.1.0

Versions of packages lvm2 recommends:
pn  thin-provisioning-tools  <none>

lvm2 suggests no packages.

-- no debconf information

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1021469

FromTom Overlund <tomov@dilacero.org>
Date2020-08-13 16:30 +0200
Message-ID<ADmoV-6eG-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1020186
I know Debian is a volunteer project, but it seems like bad form when a package-breaking bug is reported on the 
same day it is introduced, a trivial fix is availble, and 11 days later the package is still broken. One 
maintainer can trivially fix this, but in the meantime an untold number of people run across this error and have 
to spend time tracking it down.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]


Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.bugs.dist


csiph-web