pound breaks with deprecated config file syntax

Bug #67913 reported by Francois Roland
12
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
pound (Ubuntu)
Invalid
High
Unassigned

Bug Description

Binary package hint: update-manager

Steps to reproduce:

- launch update-manager with the command:
    gksu "update-manager -c -d"
- accept the disclaimer and launch the distribution upgrade
- after some time, an error message is shown:
    "Unable to install <<pound>>"
    subprocess post-installation script returned error exit status 1

Revision history for this message
Francois Roland (rolaf) wrote :
Revision history for this message
Francois Roland (rolaf) wrote :
Revision history for this message
Francois Roland (rolaf) wrote :
Michael Vogt (mvo)
Changed in update-manager:
importance: Undecided → High
status: Unconfirmed → Confirmed
Revision history for this message
Michael Vogt (mvo) wrote : Re: "pound" postinst breaks during dapper to edgy dist-upgrade

I tried to reproduce this on a stock pound install/upgrade and was unable to reproduce it. Is this maybe releated to some customization in pounds config?

Changed in pound:
status: Confirmed → Needs Info
Revision history for this message
Francois Roland (rolaf) wrote :

Here is my pound config file.
Having tried to launch it manually from the command-line and in verbose mode, it seems that pound has problem parsing it. Looking in the pound man page, I've found that the configuration file syntax has change.

I'll modify it until Pound can be started and then I'll attach it. It's a pity that the dist-upgrade I've made hasn't asked me to change my config file before failing.

It looks now clear that the error was due to pound not being able to be started back by the postinstall script.

Revision history for this message
Francois Roland (rolaf) wrote :

Wow, that's a change of syntax!

I can understand that the package scripts cannot change this file automatically. But then, why not showing the end-user a screen with the new default config file and asking whether this new file should replace the old one. (Maybe I'm expecting too much but I must admit that I've worked a long time with Gentoo which has wonderful, yet simple, tools and procedures to resolve this kind of problem easily.)

Anyway, thanks for tackling my bug so fast.

Revision history for this message
Michael Vogt (mvo) wrote :

Thanks for this added information.

This is really no shortcoming of the ubuntu packaging tools in use, but a bug in the package itself.

Revision history for this message
Rob Moore (roborative) wrote :

From what I understand I'd say it's a shortcoming because it kills the upgrade and leaves the user with a potentially unstable system. I would expect that the upgrade would acknowledge it couldn't process a given package and give the user the option to exclude/remove the package and finish the upgrade.

Revision history for this message
Francois Roland (rolaf) wrote :

I've seen that this bug is still in state "needs info". Do you still miss some beyond the ones I've given???

William Grant (wgrant)
Changed in pound:
status: Needs Info → Unconfirmed
Revision history for this message
Emmet Hikory (persia) wrote :

I've ubsubscribed ubuntu-ubiverse-sponsors from this bug, as I cannot find nything that requires upload or approval yet. Please resubscribe ubuntu-universe-sponsors when there is a patch to apply or a sync to approve. Thank you.

Revision history for this message
grasshopper (blackwolf-franken-online) wrote :

Misusage of pound.

Changed in pound:
status: New → Invalid
To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  
Everyone can see this information.

Duplicates of this bug

Other bug subscribers

Remote bug watches

Bug watches keep track of this bug in other bug trackers.