Merge ~bryce/ubuntu/+source/apache2:sru-lp1832182-graceful-xenial into ubuntu/+source/apache2:ubuntu/xenial-devel
Status: | Merged |
---|---|
Approved by: | Bryce Harrington on 2020-11-19 |
Approved revision: | a6873885675d0b34f76c9e7baac224c4f6da79cd |
Merge reported by: | Christian Ehrhardt |
Merged at revision: | a6873885675d0b34f76c9e7baac224c4f6da79cd |
Proposed branch: | ~bryce/ubuntu/+source/apache2:sru-lp1832182-graceful-xenial |
Merge into: | ubuntu/+source/apache2:ubuntu/xenial-devel |
Diff against target: |
80 lines (+43/-3) 2 files modified
debian/apache2ctl (+36/-3) debian/changelog (+7/-0) |
Related bugs: |
Reviewer | Review Type | Date Requested | Status |
---|---|---|---|
Christian Ehrhardt | 2020-11-13 | Approve on 2020-11-17 | |
Ubuntu Server Dev import team | 2020-11-13 | Pending | |
Canonical Server Team | 2020-11-13 | Pending | |
Review via email:
|
Description of the change
Backport to xenial of fix from
https:/
In bionic and newer, the 'start' command has already been updated to work with systemd, but that fix appears to have not been backported to xenial. (I'm not certain why; guessing it's just an oversight?)
This branch backports that older fix along with this expansion of the fix to also cover the 'graceful' command.
PPA: https:/
SRU: https:/
Forwarded to Debian: https:/
n.b. I will be SRUing this branch along with a fix for https:/
Christian Ehrhardt (paelzer) wrote : | # |
- 826c7d3... by Bryce Harrington on 2020-11-16
Bryce Harrington (bryce) wrote : | # |
Thanks for catching that. This branch is slightly different from the others in that it didn't have the prior fix for start, and I just forgot to commit the combined changes.
Christian Ehrhardt (paelzer) wrote : | # |
In regard to the discussion we had in the MPs for newer releases - in Xenial start didn't issue the messages yet. We could now either go:
a) on the SRU let us not add stdout messages to start&graceful
or
b) let us add the same that was added in later releases (matches what is proposed right now)
Should we maybe get an SRU member to comment on their preference before uploading to proposed?
+1 from the MP review POV.
Bryce Harrington (bryce) wrote : | # |
I've gone ahead and uploaded it. Since the messages print only for the currently bugged case I don't think the extra verbosity is going to be an issue. But I'll mention it in the SRU to highlight the situation for the SRU reviewer. I'm combining this with the conf file fix for MP 1899611 so there may end up being some discussion on this already.
Thanks again for the reviews.
Christian Ehrhardt (paelzer) wrote : | # |
This has been merged, pushed to proposed and removed from there again.
Never the less in regard to the MP - this is merged.
This MP only has the changelog commit - forgot something to push?