[pkg-bacula-devel] [bacula] 02/04: Move bscan into it's own package, making bacula-sd-DBTYPE obsolete
sven at svenhartge.de
Tue Jul 26 09:07:46 UTC 2016
On 26.07.2016 11:01, Carsten Leonhardt wrote:
>> But now we may run into a problem if the director is restarted before
>> bacula-director-DBTYPE is configured correctly. For example we may miss
>> the needed DB updates or the new libbaccats.so is not yet unpacked.
> I think it should just work. From the policy:
> "The Depends field should also be used if the postinst or prerm scripts
> require the depended-on package to be unpacked or configured in order to
OK, no worries then.
bacula-director depends on bacula-director-DBTYPE depends on
bacula-common-DBTYPE. Before bacula-director postinst is run, all other
packages have to be configured. Yes, it should work.
> But that's one reason why I'd like to do extensive tests before I upload
> anything from this branch.
Of course. In the end, nothing beats a real test instead of theorizing.
>> This is why in the original packages the prerm/postinst of
>> bacula-director-DBTYPE had a hardcoded invoke-rc.d to stop and start the
>> directord, while the init-script was in bacula-director-common.
> I think that was for historical reasons, because debhelper couldn't cope
> with the way the packages were split.
Possible. Since the packages had quite the flux of maintainership, I
guess many things have been lost to the mist of the past.
>> BTW: the wrong dependency on bacula-common-pgsql appears in
>> bacula-director as well:
> Yes, quite probable, because of typos in debian/rules which am fixing
OK. Please signal as soon as you have something test-worthy and I will
spin up my build-roots to test the packages.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about the pkg-bacula-devel