[Bug 173459] Review Request: initng

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: initng


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173459





------- Additional Comments From daner964 at student.liu.se  2005-11-27 06:52 EST -------
(In reply to comment #48)
> * The versioned dependencies
> 
>   | Requires: glibc >= 2.3
>   | Requires: bash >= 3.0
> 
>   are pretty pointless with recent RPM. You (probably) want a certain
>   upstream version but such a dependencies can not be expressed with
>   rpm anymore because missing epoch are assumed to be '0'; e.g. a
>   package 'glibc = 1:2.1' would fulfill the deps above.

But Fedora doesn't use epochs for neither glibc nor bash, do we? Gauret, what do
you say about this?

> * I would like to avoid the
> 
>   | Requires(post): mkinitrd
> 
>   dependency. It adds lot of bloat which is not required for core
>   initng functionality and might be unwanted in chroot() environments
>   like vservers.

Makes sense to me. But then again, I think it's a question for the rpm building
guru's here ;-)


> * 'ngc --help' produces
> 
>   | ...
>   |  [-A] --service_dep_on_deep opt  : Print what services me depends on deep
>   |  [-b] --service_dep_on_me opt    : Print what dependencies that are
depending on me
>   | *** buffer overflow detected ***: ngc terminated
>   | ======= Backtrace: =========
>   | /lib/libc.so.6(__chk_fail+0x41)[0x4f561c45]
>   | /lib/libc.so.6(__strcpy_chk+0x0)[0x4f561298]
>   | ngc[0x8049011]
>   | ngc[0x8049169]
>   | ngc[0x80495eb]
>   | /lib/libc.so.6(__libc_start_main+0xdf)[0x4f498d5f]
>   | ...

Que? This is really strange! Is it reproducable?

> * system/mountfs.i contains
> 
>   |       # /bin/mount all type bind.
>   |       /bin/mount -at bind
> 
>   This is problematic because:
> 
>   a) it does not handle entries like
> 
>      | /srv/mnt/var/volatile/cache     /var/cache                      none  
 bind,nosuid
> 
>      There, the -t type is 'none' but not 'bind'. Such a notation
>      reflects the underlying mount(2) syscall because 'bind' is a
>      mountflag but not a filesystemtype. Writing
> 
>      | /bin/mount -at none
> 
>      would mount them too.

Ok, I don't know much about these things, but wouldn't that also mount other
things? Most of what needs to be mounted seems to be mounted some lines up...

> * system/issue.i creates an /etc/issue with
> 
>   | Unknown distribution
> 
>   This should be replaced with content of /etc/fedora-release

Are you really using latest release? This is a known bug in earlier versions, I
really thought it was long gone...

> * there are several places were 'shud' is used instead of 'should'. This
>   typo should be fixed

Haha... Well, Jimmy (the author) is heck of a coder, but his english really
sucks. I'll look what I can do in svn ;-)

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.