Debian Bug report logs - #422968
is logrotate really necessary to run the package?

version graph

Package: samba; Maintainer for samba is Debian Samba Maintainers <pkg-samba-maint@lists.alioth.debian.org>; Source for samba is src:samba.

Reported by: Ivan Shmakov <oneingray@gmail.com>

Date: Wed, 9 May 2007 05:18:01 UTC

Severity: wishlist

Found in version samba/3.0.24-6

Done: Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

Toggle useless messages

View this report as an mbox folder, status mbox, maintainer mbox


Report forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Debian Samba Maintainers <pkg-samba-maint@lists.alioth.debian.org>:
Bug#422968; Package samba. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Ivan Shmakov <oneingray@gmail.com>:
New Bug report received and forwarded. Copy sent to Debian Samba Maintainers <pkg-samba-maint@lists.alioth.debian.org>. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #5 received at submit@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ivan Shmakov <ivan@ivanshmakov.homeip.net>
To: submit@bugs.debian.org
Subject: is logrotate really necessary to run the package?
Date: 09 May 2007 12:11:48 +0700
Package: samba
Version: 3.0.24-6
Severity: wishlist

   Depends: ..., logrotate, ...
   Recommends: smbldap-tools

	Is the dependency on `logrotate' really necessary?  Couldn't it
	be put into `Recommends:' field instead?  It will allow users to
	use different programs to rotate the logs without the need to
	install `logrotate' just to satisfy the dependency.

	Consider, e. g., the `lvm-common' package dependencies:

   Depends: libc6 (>= 2.3.2.ds1-21), module-init-tools | modutils (>> 2.3.11-2)
   Recommends: logrotate




Reply sent to Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org>:
You have taken responsibility. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Notification sent to Ivan Shmakov <oneingray@gmail.com>:
Bug acknowledged by developer. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #10 received at 422968-done@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org>
To: Ivan Shmakov <oneingray@gmail.com>, 422968-done@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#422968: is logrotate really necessary to run the package?
Date: Tue, 8 May 2007 23:39:05 -0700
On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 12:11:48PM +0700, Ivan Shmakov wrote:
> Package: samba
> Version: 3.0.24-6
> Severity: wishlist

>    Depends: ..., logrotate, ...
>    Recommends: smbldap-tools

> 	Is the dependency on `logrotate' really necessary?

Yes; packages should not facilitate users to shoot themselves in the foot
by filling up the logging partition.

>  Couldn't it be put into `Recommends:' field instead?
>  It will allow users to use different programs to rotate the logs without
>  the need to install `logrotate' just to satisfy the dependency.

Users can use whatever they want to rotate the logs, with or without the
dependency, by editing the logrotate config files and configuring their own
log rotation program.  But logrotate is Priority: important, is lightweight
(/usr/sbin/logrotate weighs in at 40k on i386, which is less than, say,
/bin/sed), and is the standard log rotation mechanism in Debian (including
documentation in Debian policy).

> 	Consider, e. g., the `lvm-common' package dependencies:

>    Depends: libc6 (>= 2.3.2.ds1-21), module-init-tools | modutils (>> 2.3.11-2)
>    Recommends: logrotate

There are 20 packages in sid which recommend logrotate -- but there are 52
packages in sid that depend on it.  If you think the majority of packages
are wrong in their handling of logrotate, please discuss this on
debian-devel and get a consensus for such a change, rather than asking
individual packages to change to accommodate your singular preference.

-- 
Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
vorlon@debian.org                                   http://www.debian.org/



Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Debian Samba Maintainers <pkg-samba-maint@lists.alioth.debian.org>:
Bug#422968; Package samba. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Ivan Shmakov <oneingray@gmail.com>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Debian Samba Maintainers <pkg-samba-maint@lists.alioth.debian.org>. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #15 received at 422968@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ivan Shmakov <ivan@ivanshmakov.homeip.net>
To: 422968@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Bug#422968: is logrotate really necessary to run the package?
Date: 09 May 2007 15:34:10 +0700
>>>>> "SL" == Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> writes:

[...]

 >> Is the dependency on `logrotate' really necessary?

 SL> Yes; packages should not facilitate users to shoot themselves in
 SL> the foot by filling up the logging partition.

	No system is foolproof since fools are so clever.  There're a
	plenty of ways to end with a filled up /var/log/ with logrotate
	installed, ain't there?

 >> Couldn't it be put into `Recommends:' field instead?  It will allow
 >> users to use different programs to rotate the logs without the need
 >> to install `logrotate' just to satisfy the dependency.

 SL> Users can use whatever they want to rotate the logs, with or
 SL> without the dependency, by editing the logrotate config files and
 SL> configuring their own log rotation program.  But logrotate is
 SL> Priority: important,

	Doesn't it mean that D-I will probably install it anyway?
	(Hadn't used D-I for a few years; may be wrong.)

 SL> is lightweight (/usr/sbin/logrotate weighs in at 40k on i386, which
 SL> is less than, say, /bin/sed), and is the standard log rotation
 SL> mechanism in Debian (including documentation in Debian policy).

	Debian policy, AIUI, requires a package to supply an adequate
	logrotate.d/ file.  It doesn't state anything with respect to
	this matter about the contents of a `control' file.

[...]

 SL> There are 20 packages in sid which recommend logrotate -- but there
 SL> are 52 packages in sid that depend on it.

	There're a few which `Suggest' it, too.

	And there're some packages (in etch, at least) which provide
	logrotate.d/ files, but don't mention `logrotate' as a
	dependency at all.  Among others:

apache2-common
dpkg
exim4-base
ppp
xdm

	Under some load, either of `apache2-common' or `exim4-base'
	could fill up /var/log/ rather quickly, I guess.

 SL> If you think the majority of packages are wrong in their handling
 SL> of logrotate, please discuss this on debian-devel

	Well, looks like it had to be discussed.  I've found a rather
	old conversation in the archive:

http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2000/07/msg00108.html
http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2000/07/msg00110.html

	But it doesn't make the matter any clearer to me.

 SL> and get a consensus for such a change, rather than asking
 SL> individual packages to change to accommodate your singular
 SL> preference.

	I guess, installing some dummy-logrotate package with
	``Provides: logrotate'' in `control' will suffice for a
	temporary solution?




Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Debian Samba Maintainers <pkg-samba-maint@lists.alioth.debian.org>:
Bug#422968; Package samba. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Ivan Shmakov <oneingray@gmail.com>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Debian Samba Maintainers <pkg-samba-maint@lists.alioth.debian.org>. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #20 received at 422968@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ivan Shmakov <ivan@ivanshmakov.homeip.net>
To: 422968@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Bug#422968: is logrotate really necessary to run the package?
Date: 09 May 2007 15:35:03 +0700
>>>>> "SL" == Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> writes:

[...]

 >> Is the dependency on `logrotate' really necessary?

 SL> Yes; packages should not facilitate users to shoot themselves in
 SL> the foot by filling up the logging partition.

	No system is foolproof since fools are so clever.  There're a
	plenty of ways to end with a filled up /var/log/ with logrotate
	installed, ain't there?

 >> Couldn't it be put into `Recommends:' field instead?  It will allow
 >> users to use different programs to rotate the logs without the need
 >> to install `logrotate' just to satisfy the dependency.

 SL> Users can use whatever they want to rotate the logs, with or
 SL> without the dependency, by editing the logrotate config files and
 SL> configuring their own log rotation program.  But logrotate is
 SL> Priority: important,

	Doesn't it mean that D-I will probably install it anyway?
	(Hadn't used D-I for a few years; may be wrong.)

 SL> is lightweight (/usr/sbin/logrotate weighs in at 40k on i386, which
 SL> is less than, say, /bin/sed), and is the standard log rotation
 SL> mechanism in Debian (including documentation in Debian policy).

	Debian policy, AIUI, requires a package to supply an adequate
	logrotate.d/ file.  It doesn't state anything with respect to
	this matter about the contents of a `control' file.

[...]

 SL> There are 20 packages in sid which recommend logrotate -- but there
 SL> are 52 packages in sid that depend on it.

	There're a few which `Suggest' it, too.

	And there're some packages (in etch, at least) which provide
	logrotate.d/ files, but don't mention `logrotate' as a
	dependency at all.  Among others:

apache2-common
dpkg
exim4-base
ppp
xdm

	Under some load, either of `apache2-common' or `exim4-base'
	could fill up /var/log/ rather quickly, I guess.

 SL> If you think the majority of packages are wrong in their handling
 SL> of logrotate, please discuss this on debian-devel

	Well, looks like it had to be discussed.  I've found a rather
	old conversation in the archive:

http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2000/07/msg00108.html
http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2000/07/msg00110.html

	But it doesn't make the matter any clearer to me.

 SL> and get a consensus for such a change, rather than asking
 SL> individual packages to change to accommodate your singular
 SL> preference.

	I guess, installing some dummy-logrotate package with
	``Provides: logrotate'' in `control' will suffice for a
	temporary solution?




Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Debian Samba Maintainers <pkg-samba-maint@lists.alioth.debian.org>:
Bug#422968; Package samba. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Debian Samba Maintainers <pkg-samba-maint@lists.alioth.debian.org>. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #25 received at 422968@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org>
To: Ivan Shmakov <oneingray@gmail.com>, 422968@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#422968: is logrotate really necessary to run the package?
Date: Wed, 9 May 2007 20:24:05 -0700
On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 03:34:10PM +0700, Ivan Shmakov wrote:
>  SL> Users can use whatever they want to rotate the logs, with or
>  SL> without the dependency, by editing the logrotate config files and
>  SL> configuring their own log rotation program.  But logrotate is
>  SL> Priority: important,

> 	Doesn't it mean that D-I will probably install it anyway?
> 	(Hadn't used D-I for a few years; may be wrong.)

Yes, it does.  But I don't think this is an argument against the dependency,
I think it's an argument for it.

>  SL> is lightweight (/usr/sbin/logrotate weighs in at 40k on i386, which
>  SL> is less than, say, /bin/sed), and is the standard log rotation
>  SL> mechanism in Debian (including documentation in Debian policy).

> 	Debian policy, AIUI, requires a package to supply an adequate
> 	logrotate.d/ file.  It doesn't state anything with respect to
> 	this matter about the contents of a `control' file.

True.

>  SL> and get a consensus for such a change, rather than asking
>  SL> individual packages to change to accommodate your singular
>  SL> preference.

> 	I guess, installing some dummy-logrotate package with
> 	``Provides: logrotate'' in `control' will suffice for a
> 	temporary solution?

Yes, or as a permanent (but local) solution.

Cheers,
-- 
Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
vorlon@debian.org                                   http://www.debian.org/



Bug archived. Request was from Debbugs Internal Request <owner@bugs.debian.org> to internal_control@bugs.debian.org. (Mon, 18 Jun 2007 14:50:45 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Send a report that this bug log contains spam.


Debian bug tracking system administrator <owner@bugs.debian.org>. Last modified: Thu Apr 24 20:22:36 2014; Machine Name: buxtehude.debian.org

Debian Bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.