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

Groups > linux.debian.kernel > #53790 > unrolled thread

Bug#822730: initramfs-tools: Should we migrate to a "interest-noawait" trigger for update-initramfs -u?

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.kernel

Contents

  Bug#822730: initramfs-tools: Should we migrate to a "interest-noawait" trigger for update-initramfs -u? Niels Thykier <niels@thykier.net> - 2016-04-26 22:40 +0200
    Bug#822730: initramfs-tools: Should we migrate to a "interest-noawait" trigger for update-initramfs -u? Niels Thykier <niels@thykier.net> - 2017-07-09 15:00 +0200
      Bug#822730: initramfs-tools: Should we migrate to a "interest-noawait" trigger for update-initramfs -u? Niels Thykier <niels@thykier.net> - 2017-12-31 17:40 +0100
        Bug#822730: initramfs-tools: Should we migrate to a "interest-noawait" trigger for update-initramfs -u? Niels Thykier <niels@thykier.net> - 2018-02-18 08:40 +0100
          Bug#822730: initramfs-tools: Should we migrate to a "interest-noawait" trigger for update-initramfs -u? Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> - 2018-07-19 03:10 +0200
    Processed: Re: initramfs-tools: Should we migrate to a  "interest-noawait" trigger for update-initramfs -u? "Debian Bug Tracking System" <owner@bugs.debian.org> - 2017-12-31 17:50 +0100
    Bug#822730: marked as done (initramfs-tools: Should we migrate to  a "interest-noawait" trigger for update-initramfs -u?) "Debian Bug Tracking System" <owner@bugs.debian.org> - 2018-04-04 21:50 +0200
    Processed: Re: Bug#822730: initramfs-tools: Should we migrate to  a "interest-noawait" trigger for update-initramfs -u? "Debian Bug Tracking System" <owner@bugs.debian.org> - 2020-04-18 00:30 +0200

#53790 — Bug#822730: initramfs-tools: Should we migrate to a "interest-noawait" trigger for update-initramfs -u?

Package: initramfs-tools
Version: 0.125
Severity: wishlist
Usertags: declarative-packaging 

Hi,

The update-initramfs tool currently has a bit of magic for deferring
changes during upgrades (by exploiting dpkg-trigger).  This is fine,
but I was wondering if we could perhaps add a file-based interest
trigger (or simply migrate to a declarative activate-noawait trigger).

I got basically two reasons for this bug:

 * Request for support in debhelper #491027 and lintian #678962
 * Promotion of "declarative packaging"[1].


At first glance[2], I would recommend adding a file-based trigger for the
following reasons:

 * Packages would just need to install files in
   usr/share/initramfs-tools/{hooks,scripts} and initramfs-tools
   would take care of the rest.

 * There would be no need for lintian tags or changes to debhelper to
   improve support.  It would "just work"(tm).

This file-based trigger would be used in /addition/ to the existing
trigger.  AFAICT, some packages only conditionally need to trigger
update-initramfs (and these would still need to be able to call
"dpkg-trigger --no-await update-initramfs").

 * What do you think about this suggestion?

 * Alternatively, would the use of declarative triggers[3] be ok for
   the debhelper support?


Thanks,
~Niels

[1] https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/Dpkg/Spec/DeclarativePackaging

[2] I admit having very limited overview over the use-cases around
update-initramfs.

[3] Like we did with ldconfig.  Basically add

  activate-noawait update-initramfs

to the packages' triggers file.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#58316

On Tue, 26 Apr 2016 22:10:14 +0200 Niels Thykier <niels@thykier.net> wrote:
> Package: initramfs-tools
> Version: 0.125
> Severity: wishlist
> Usertags: declarative-packaging 
> 
> Hi,
> 

Hi,

Any comments on this? :)

Thanks,
~Niels

PS: Quoted in full below for your convenience. :)

> The update-initramfs tool currently has a bit of magic for deferring
> changes during upgrades (by exploiting dpkg-trigger).  This is fine,
> but I was wondering if we could perhaps add a file-based interest
> trigger (or simply migrate to a declarative activate-noawait trigger).
> 
> I got basically two reasons for this bug:
> 
>  * Request for support in debhelper #491027 and lintian #678962
>  * Promotion of "declarative packaging"[1].
> 
> 
> At first glance[2], I would recommend adding a file-based trigger for the
> following reasons:
> 
>  * Packages would just need to install files in
>    usr/share/initramfs-tools/{hooks,scripts} and initramfs-tools
>    would take care of the rest.
> 
>  * There would be no need for lintian tags or changes to debhelper to
>    improve support.  It would "just work"(tm).
> 
> This file-based trigger would be used in /addition/ to the existing
> trigger.  AFAICT, some packages only conditionally need to trigger
> update-initramfs (and these would still need to be able to call
> "dpkg-trigger --no-await update-initramfs").
> 
>  * What do you think about this suggestion?
> 
>  * Alternatively, would the use of declarative triggers[3] be ok for
>    the debhelper support?
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> ~Niels
> 
> [1] https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/Dpkg/Spec/DeclarativePackaging
> 
> [2] I admit having very limited overview over the use-cases around
> update-initramfs.
> 
> [3] Like we did with ldconfig.  Basically add
> 
>   activate-noawait update-initramfs
> 
> to the packages' triggers file.
> 
> 

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

#59802

Control: block 491027 by -1

On Sun, 09 Jul 2017 12:51:00 +0000 Niels Thykier <niels@thykier.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Apr 2016 22:10:14 +0200 Niels Thykier <niels@thykier.net> wrote:
> > Package: initramfs-tools
> > Version: 0.125
> > Severity: wishlist
> > Usertags: declarative-packaging 
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> 
> [...]

Ping on this?

> PS: Quoted in full below for your convenience. :)
> 
> > The update-initramfs tool currently has a bit of magic for deferring
> > changes during upgrades (by exploiting dpkg-trigger).  This is fine,
> > but I was wondering if we could perhaps add a file-based interest
> > trigger (or simply migrate to a declarative activate-noawait trigger).
> > 
> > I got basically two reasons for this bug:
> > 
> >  * Request for support in debhelper #491027 and lintian #678962
> >  * Promotion of "declarative packaging"[1].
> > 
> > 
> > At first glance[2], I would recommend adding a file-based trigger for the
> > following reasons:
> > 
> >  * Packages would just need to install files in
> >    usr/share/initramfs-tools/{hooks,scripts} and initramfs-tools
> >    would take care of the rest.
> > 
> >  * There would be no need for lintian tags or changes to debhelper to
> >    improve support.  It would "just work"(tm).
> > 
> > This file-based trigger would be used in /addition/ to the existing
> > trigger.  AFAICT, some packages only conditionally need to trigger
> > update-initramfs (and these would still need to be able to call
> > "dpkg-trigger --no-await update-initramfs").
> > 
> >  * What do you think about this suggestion?
> > 
> >  * Alternatively, would the use of declarative triggers[3] be ok for
> >    the debhelper support?
> > 
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > ~Niels
> > 
> > [1] https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/Dpkg/Spec/DeclarativePackaging
> > 
> > [2] I admit having very limited overview over the use-cases around
> > update-initramfs.
> > 
> > [3] Like we did with ldconfig.  Basically add
> > 
> >   activate-noawait update-initramfs
> > 
> > to the packages' triggers file.

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

#60237

On Sun, 31 Dec 2017 16:29:00 +0000 Niels Thykier <niels@thykier.net> wrote:
> Control: block 491027 by -1
> 
> On Sun, 09 Jul 2017 12:51:00 +0000 Niels Thykier <niels@thykier.net> wrote:
> > On Tue, 26 Apr 2016 22:10:14 +0200 Niels Thykier <niels@thykier.net> wrote:
> > > Package: initramfs-tools
> > > Version: 0.125
> > > Severity: wishlist
> > > Usertags: declarative-packaging 
> > > 
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > 
> > [...]
> 
> Ping on this?
> 

Hi,

I have been pinging this bug for nearly two years (admittedly with quite
some time between some of the pings) without any replies.

@Ben: Given you appear to be the one doing the actual uploads (i.e. sign
+ upload), could I ask you to review the bug and come with your take on
this?

Thanks,
~Niels

> > > The update-initramfs tool currently has a bit of magic for deferring
> > > changes during upgrades (by exploiting dpkg-trigger).  This is fine,
> > > but I was wondering if we could perhaps add a file-based interest
> > > trigger (or simply migrate to a declarative activate-noawait trigger).
> > > 
> > > I got basically two reasons for this bug:
> > > 
> > >  * Request for support in debhelper #491027 and lintian #678962
> > >  * Promotion of "declarative packaging"[1].
> > > 
> > > 
> > > At first glance[2], I would recommend adding a file-based trigger for the
> > > following reasons:
> > > 
> > >  * Packages would just need to install files in
> > >    usr/share/initramfs-tools/{hooks,scripts} and initramfs-tools
> > >    would take care of the rest.
> > > 
> > >  * There would be no need for lintian tags or changes to debhelper to
> > >    improve support.  It would "just work"(tm).
> > > 
> > > This file-based trigger would be used in /addition/ to the existing
> > > trigger.  AFAICT, some packages only conditionally need to trigger
> > > update-initramfs (and these would still need to be able to call
> > > "dpkg-trigger --no-await update-initramfs").
> > > 
> > >  * What do you think about this suggestion?
> > > 
> > >  * Alternatively, would the use of declarative triggers[3] be ok for
> > >    the debhelper support?
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Thanks,
> > > ~Niels
> > > 
> > > [...]

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

#61494

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

On Sun, 2018-02-18 at 07:35 +0000, Niels Thykier wrote:
> On Sun, 31 Dec 2017 16:29:00 +0000 Niels Thykier <niels@thykier.net> wrote:
> > Control: block 491027 by -1
> > 
> > On Sun, 09 Jul 2017 12:51:00 +0000 Niels Thykier <niels@thykier.net> wrote:
> > > On Tue, 26 Apr 2016 22:10:14 +0200 Niels Thykier <niels@thykier.net> wrote:
> > > > Package: initramfs-tools
> > > > Version: 0.125
> > > > Severity: wishlist
> > > > Usertags: declarative-packaging 
> > > > 
> > > > Hi,
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > [...]
> > 
> > Ping on this?
> > 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I have been pinging this bug for nearly two years (admittedly with quite
> some time between some of the pings) without any replies.
> 
> @Ben: Given you appear to be the one doing the actual uploads (i.e. sign
> + upload), could I ask you to review the bug and come with your take on
> this?

I finally had a look at this while preparing a new version.  Sorry for
taking so long, but I hope you understand that wishlist bugs asking a
question are not a high priority.

The dpkg documentation isn't clear (#904060), but it appears to me that
if we use "interest-noawait" then an activating package that really
needs to await will not be able to do so.  If we carry on using
"interest" (or "interest-await") then the activating package can choose
whether to await the trigger or not.

A search for explicit triggers:
https://codesearch.debian.net/search?q=activate.*update-initramfs
shows that there are packages that use "activate-await", and I would
not want to override that without consultation.

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings
We get into the habit of living before acquiring the habit of thinking.
                                                         - Albert Camus

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

#59803 — Processed: Re: initramfs-tools: Should we migrate to a "interest-noawait" trigger for update-initramfs -u?

Processing control commands:

> block 491027 by -1
Bug #491027 [debhelper] debhelper: please add dh_initramfs to handle initramfs hooks and postinst/rm snippets
491027 was not blocked by any bugs.
491027 was not blocking any bugs.
Added blocking bug(s) of 491027: 822730

-- 
491027: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=491027
822730: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=822730
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems

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

#60626 — Bug#822730: marked as done (initramfs-tools: Should we migrate to a "interest-noawait" trigger for update-initramfs -u?)

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

Your message dated Wed, 04 Apr 2018 19:18:00 +0000
with message-id <c914046a-ca78-32f5-c5ea-f815743c0c95@thykier.net>
and subject line Re: initramfs-tools: Should we migrate to a "interest-noawait" trigger for update-initramfs -u?
has caused the Debian Bug report #822730,
regarding initramfs-tools: Should we migrate to a "interest-noawait" trigger for update-initramfs -u?
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
822730: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=822730
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems

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

#66819 — Processed: Re: Bug#822730: initramfs-tools: Should we migrate to a "interest-noawait" trigger for update-initramfs -u?

Processing control commands:

> reassign -1 debhelper
Bug #822730 {Done: Niels Thykier <niels@thykier.net>} [initramfs-tools] initramfs-tools: Should we migrate to a "interest-noawait" trigger for update-initramfs -u?
Bug reassigned from package 'initramfs-tools' to 'debhelper'.
No longer marked as found in versions initramfs-tools/0.125.
Ignoring request to alter fixed versions of bug #822730 to the same values previously set

-- 
822730: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=822730
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.kernel

csiph-web