Custom Query (1145 matches)
Results (121 - 123 of 1145)
| Ticket | Resolution | Summary | Owner | Reporter |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| #253 | fixed | PXE preseed needs additional option for Jaunty | broder | |
| Description |
The PXE installer will currently prompt once on Jaunty installs. I believe that adding the following to the preseed file should eliminate it:
|
|||
| #256 | fixed | Trim the cruft from cshrc dotfiles | jdreed | |
| Description |
A while back, we decided that we should revert to upstream default settings for the shells. To that end, I propose the following changes: diff -Naur /usr/lib/init/cshrc /usr/lib/init.new/cshrc --- /usr/lib/init/cshrc 2009-05-20 01:11:11.000000000 -0400 +++ /usr/lib/init.new/cshrc 2009-05-20 11:43:31.000000000 -0400 @@ -112,14 +112,11 @@ unalias extend sextend textend - if ((! $?NOCALLS) && (-r ~/.path)) then - # Support .path files for compatibility. - set athena_path=($path) - source ~/.path - else - # Standard Athena path additions. - set path=(`/usr/bin/athdir $HOME` $path .) - endif + # .path files are no longer supported, consult Athena documentation + # for the correct way to specify your PATH + + # Standard Athena path additions. + set path=(`/usr/bin/athdir $HOME` $path .) endif @@ -135,10 +132,6 @@ set noclobber # Don't overwrite files with redirection if ($?prompt) then # For interactive shells only (i.e., NOT rsh): - # Set prompt. - set promptchars="%#" - set prompt = "athena%# " - set cdpath = (~) set interactive # Provide shell variable for compatability endif |
|||
| #257 | wontfix | Consider bumping priority of openafs-modules metapackages from extra to optional | mitchb | |
| Description |
Despite having openafs-modules-foo metapackages installed, machines that don't update via debathena-auto-update (i.e any machine below the new debathena-workstation) can take a new kernel before the new AFS modules are ready. Sometimes apt[itude] will choose to remove the AFS metapackage instead of holding back the kernel. Greg says that the autoupdate infrastructure avoids the problem by aborting any update where the proposed actions include removal of important debathena metapackages. Tim says that increasing the priority of the metapackage will make apt less likely to prefer its removal. dkms support exists in Jaunty, and ticket #243 is about figuring out how to use it, but it sounds like this may be very unlikely to end up in Hardy and Intrepid, so we're still stuck with an issue for many machines. Evan requested this ticket so that we can first get a sense of whether bumping the priority will actually work. Some background e-mails from a debathena@ thread below: * To: debathena@… Subject: How does the kernel/openafs version sync thing work again? Date: Mon, 04 May 2009 21:30:16 -0400 From: Mitchell E Berger <mitchb@…> This afternoon, I tried to take updates on a machine I maintain, only to find that it wanted to upgrade the kernel and punt the openafs metapackages. I was pretty sure we had something in place to avoid upgrading the kernel until the new modules were ready, but I didn't recall the details, so I asked Evan to refresh me on it. After briefly looking at the machine with me, he concluded that the machine's setup looked right and perhaps something is wrong with the infrastructure that's supposed to avoid this problem. So, he suggested I send mail in the hopes that Greg or someone else will know what's amiss. When he initially saw the changes that apt-get and aptitude were proposing, Evan asked if this machine had not been updated in a while. In fact, it's updated pretty much daily, via 'apt-get dist-upgrade'. Any ideas? Thanks, Mitch Vital stats: ============ # athinfo localhost version debathena-login on Ubuntu 8.04.2 # uname -a Linux 2.6.24-23-xen #1 SMP Wed Apr 1 23:47:10 UTC 2009 x86_64 GNU/Linux (Note: This machine generally lives as a ParaVM under the -xen kernel, but it also has the -generic kernel installed) ========================================================================== # apt-get dist-upgrade Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree Reading state information... Done Calculating upgrade... Done The following packages will be REMOVED:
The following NEW packages will be installed:
.6.24-24-generic linux-ubuntu-modules-2.6.24-24-xen The following packages have been kept back:
The following packages will be upgraded:
4 upgraded, 4 newly installed, 2 to remove and 1 not upgraded. Need to get 47.5MB of archives. After this operation, 189MB of additional disk space will be used. =========================================================================== =========================================================================== # aptitude dist-upgrade Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree Reading state information... Done Reading extended state information Initializing package states... Done Building tag database... Done The following packages are BROKEN:
The following packages are unused and will be REMOVED:
The following NEW packages will be installed:
.6.24-24-generic linux-ubuntu-modules-2.6.24-24-xen The following packages will be upgraded:
5 packages upgraded, 4 newly installed, 2 to remove and 0 not upgraded. Need to get 47.5MB of archives. After unpacking 182MB will be used. The following packages have unmet dependencies:
.24.24.26 is to be installed.
6 is to be installed.
Resolving dependencies... The following actions will resolve these dependencies: Remove the following packages: openafs-modules-generic openafs-modules-xen Downgrade the following packages: alpine [2.00+dfsg-1~hardy1 (hardy-backports, now) -> 1.0+dfsg-3ubuntu0.1debathen a1~ubuntu8.04 (hardy)] Score is 223 ============================================================================= ============================================================================ # dpkg -l|grep openafs- ii openafs-client 1.4.6.dfsg1-2+ubuntu0.1 ii openafs-krb5 1.4.6.dfsg1-2+ubuntu0.1 ii openafs-modules-2.6.24-22-xen 1.4.6.dfsg1-2+2.6.24-22.45 ii openafs-modules-2.6.24-23-generic 1.4.6.dfsg1-2+ubuntu0.1+2.6.24-23 .52 ii openafs-modules-2.6.24-23-xen 1.4.6.dfsg1-2+ubuntu0.1+2.6.24-23 .52 ii openafs-modules-generic 2.6.24.23.25~ubuntu8.04 ii openafs-modules-xen 2.6.24.23.25~ubuntu8.04 ============================================================================ ============================================================================ # aptitude why openafs-modules-2.6.24-23-xen i openafs-modules-xen Depends openafs-modules-2.6.24-23-xen # aptitude why openafs-modules-xen The package "openafs-modules-xen" is manually installed. # aptitude why openafs-modules-2.6.24-23-generic i openafs-modules-generic Depends openafs-modules-2.6.24-23-generic # aptitude why openafs-modules-generic The package "openafs-modules-generic" is manually installed. ============================================================================ ============================================================================ # dpkg -l|grep linux-image ii linux-image-2.6.24-22-xen 2.6.24-22.45 ii linux-image-2.6.24-23-generic 2.6.24-23.52 ii linux-image-2.6.24-23-xen 2.6.24-23.52 ii linux-image-generic 2.6.24.23.25 ii linux-image-xen 2.6.24.23.25 ============================================================================ * Subject: Re: How does the kernel/openafs version sync thing work again? From: Greg Hudson <ghudson@…> To: Mitchell E Berger <mitchb@…> Cc: debathena@… Date: Tue, 05 May 2009 11:27:23 -0400 On Mon, 2009-05-04 at 21:30 -0400, Mitchell E Berger wrote:
The mechanism really only works in combination with a check like athena-auto-update's, which aborts the update if it sees aptitude proposing to remove certain Debathena metapackages. I don't know by what mechanism apt-get is deciding that updating a kernel is more important than keeping a manually selected package, and if there's any way to override that. * Date: Tue, 5 May 2009 11:58:50 -0400 (EDT) From: Tim Abbott <tabbott@…> To: Greg Hudson <ghudson@…> cc: Mitchell E Berger <mitchb@…>, debathena@… Subject: Re: How does the kernel/openafs version sync thing work again? On Tue, 5 May 2009, Greg Hudson wrote:
Package priority is one thing that goes into this decision. Our modules package is priority: extra. If we were to raise that, aptitude would be more reluctant to remove it.
|
|||
