Debian Bug report logs - #462355
Some additions to ignore list

version graph

Package: etckeeper; Maintainer for etckeeper is Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>; Source for etckeeper is src:etckeeper.

Reported by: Alexander Gerasiov <gq@cs.msu.su>

Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 05:54:02 UTC

Severity: wishlist

Found in versions etckeeper/0.6, etckeeper/0.20

Fixed in version etckeeper/0.53

Done: Joey Hess <joeyh@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, Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>:
Bug#462355; Package etckeeper. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Alexander Gerasiov <gq@cs.msu.su>:
New Bug report received and forwarded. Copy sent to Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>. Full text and rfc822 format available.

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

From: Alexander Gerasiov <gq@cs.msu.su>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>
Subject: Some additions to ignore list
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 08:52:56 +0300
Package: etckeeper
Version: 0.6
Severity: wishlist

I'm using the following lines in .gitignore:
=====
#lvm autogenerated staff
lvm/cache
lvm/backup
lvm/archive

#twm autogenerated menu
X11/twm/menudefs.hook
X11/twm/system.twmrc
=====


-- System Information:
Debian Release: lenny/sid
  APT prefers testing-proposed-updates
  APT policy: (700, 'testing-proposed-updates'), (700, 'testing'), (670, 'proposed-updates'), (670, 'stable'), (600, 'unstable'), (550, 'experimental')
Architecture: i386 (i686)

Kernel: Linux 2.6.22-3-vserver-686 (SMP w/2 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=ru_RU.KOI8-R, LC_CTYPE=ru_RU.KOI8-R (charmap=KOI8-R)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash

Versions of packages etckeeper depends on:
ii  debconf [debconf-2.0]        1.5.18      Debian configuration management sy
ii  git-core                     1:1.5.3.8-1 fast, scalable, distributed revisi
ii  metastore                    1-2         Store and restore metadata

etckeeper recommends no packages.

-- debconf information:
* etckeeper/unclean: true
* etckeeper/commit_failed:




Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org:
Bug#462355; Package etckeeper. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #10 received at 462355@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>
To: Alexander Gerasiov <gq@cs.msu.su>, 462355@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#462355: Some additions to ignore list
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 13:52:13 -0500
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Alexander Gerasiov wrote:
> I'm using the following lines in .gitignore:
> =====
> #lvm autogenerated staff
> lvm/cache
> lvm/backup
> lvm/archive

I've thought about adding these. I need to investigate if they're all
just things that lvm stores to save time in scanning the drives, or if
some of it is information that it actually makes sense to have a backup
of. If the latter, it may make sense to keep it in git.

> #twm autogenerated menu
> X11/twm/menudefs.hook
> X11/twm/system.twmrc

I don't think that excluding system.twmrc by default is a good idea,
because it could just as easily be a locally modified config file.

I wonder why the menudefs.hook isn't put in /var? A symlink in /etc
would allow twm to find it there if nothing else.

-- 
see shy jo
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>:
Bug#462355; Package etckeeper. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Alexander GQ Gerasiov <gq@cs.msu.su>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #15 received at 462355@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Alexander GQ Gerasiov <gq@cs.msu.su>
To: Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>, 462355@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#462355: Some additions to ignore list
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 23:47:25 +0300
Thu, 24 Jan 2008 13:52:13 -0500
Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org> wrote:

JH> Alexander Gerasiov wrote:
JH> > I'm using the following lines in .gitignore:
JH> > =====
JH> > #lvm autogenerated staff
JH> > lvm/cache
JH> > lvm/backup
JH> > lvm/archive
JH> 
JH> I've thought about adding these. I need to investigate if they're
JH> all just things that lvm stores to save time in scanning the
JH> drives, or if some of it is information that it actually makes
JH> sense to have a backup of. If the latter, it may make sense to keep
JH> it in git.
lvm update this information every time you change lvm partitioning.
When you do so, it stores new configuration in backup and moves old
configuration from backup to archive. On host, where I use lvm
snapshots for every-day backup, I see many of such archives.

Lets see what is backup files: that's just a _copy_ of metadata, which
could be used in some rear cases. E.g. you lost all your lvm's
metadata. Or to restore the same partitioning on new, replaced drive.
Do we need history for it? Yes (e.g. to restore suddenly deleted
volume), but lvm tracks enough copies of old metadata in archive dir.
So keeping them in git don't needed.

And finally cache dir is for temp file where lvm stores some runtime
cache (to not rescan all physical volumes every time user calls lvm).

JH> 
JH> > #twm autogenerated menu
JH> > X11/twm/menudefs.hook
JH> > X11/twm/system.twmrc
JH> 
JH> I don't think that excluding system.twmrc by default is a good idea,
JH> because it could just as easily be a locally modified config file.
I'd looked at it once more. May be you're right. In most cases it
would be autogenerated, but sometimes there really may be local
modifications.

JH> 
JH> I wonder why the menudefs.hook isn't put in /var? A symlink in /etc
JH> would allow twm to find it there if nothing else.
I have no idea. May be we need to file a bug? I do, when have some time.


-- 
Best regards,
 Alexander GQ Gerasiov

 Contacts:
 e-mail:    gq@cs.msu.su             Jabber:  gq@jabber.ru
 Homepage:  http://gq.net.ru         ICQ:     7272757
 PGP fingerprint: 0628 ACC7 291A D4AA 6D7D  79B8 0641 D82A E3E3 CE1D




Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org:
Bug#462355; Package etckeeper. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #20 received at 462355@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>
To: Alexander GQ Gerasiov <gq@cs.msu.su>
Cc: 462355@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#462355: Some additions to ignore list
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 16:20:15 -0500
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Alexander GQ Gerasiov wrote:
> lvm update this information every time you change lvm partitioning.
> When you do so, it stores new configuration in backup and moves old
> configuration from backup to archive. On host, where I use lvm
> snapshots for every-day backup, I see many of such archives.
> 
> Lets see what is backup files: that's just a _copy_ of metadata, which
> could be used in some rear cases. E.g. you lost all your lvm's
> metadata. Or to restore the same partitioning on new, replaced drive.
> Do we need history for it? Yes (e.g. to restore suddenly deleted
> volume), but lvm tracks enough copies of old metadata in archive dir.
> So keeping them in git don't needed.

git should automatically notice that the file was renamed from archive
to backup, and only save one copy of the file.

My question is, what if I deleted my current /etc and used etckeeper to
check out a new copy from git. Would lvm transparently recreate those
lvm files as needed, or would it be better if the new /etc checkout
included them?

> And finally cache dir is for temp file where lvm stores some runtime
> cache (to not rescan all physical volumes every time user calls lvm).

The cache dir definitly seems removable then.

> JH> 
> JH> I wonder why the menudefs.hook isn't put in /var? A symlink in /etc
> JH> would allow twm to find it there if nothing else.
> I have no idea. May be we need to file a bug? I do, when have some time.

It would be better to file a bug than clutter up the default ignores 
with this, especially since most people don't have twm installed.

-- 
see shy jo
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>:
Bug#462355; Package etckeeper. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Alexander GQ Gerasiov <gq@cs.msu.su>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #25 received at 462355@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Alexander GQ Gerasiov <gq@cs.msu.su>
To: Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>, 462355@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#462355: Some additions to ignore list
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 01:16:39 +0300
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
На Thu, 24 Jan 2008 16:20:15 -0500
Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org> записано:

> Alexander GQ Gerasiov wrote:
> > lvm update this information every time you change lvm partitioning.
> > When you do so, it stores new configuration in backup and moves old
> > configuration from backup to archive. On host, where I use lvm
> > snapshots for every-day backup, I see many of such archives.
> > 
> > Lets see what is backup files: that's just a _copy_ of metadata,
> > which could be used in some rear cases. E.g. you lost all your lvm's
> > metadata. Or to restore the same partitioning on new, replaced
> > drive. Do we need history for it? Yes (e.g. to restore suddenly
> > deleted volume), but lvm tracks enough copies of old metadata in
> > archive dir. So keeping them in git don't needed.
> 
> git should automatically notice that the file was renamed from archive
> to backup, and only save one copy of the file.
May be, but what for do we need to keep them in vcs? lvm already stores
every past version there. And every file there should normally have
only one revision.
> 
> My question is, what if I deleted my current /etc and used etckeeper
> to check out a new copy from git. Would lvm transparently recreate
> those lvm files as needed, or would it be better if the new /etc
> checkout included them?
I don't understand exactly what do you mean. But lvm don't use those
files for it's normal work. They are only some backups for admin, to
allow him restore some past lvm configuration. If you check out
something from vcs lvm would not use this files.

-- 
Best regards,
 Alexander GQ Gerasiov

 Contacts:
 e-mail:    gq@cs.msu.su             Jabber:  gq@jabber.ru
 Homepage:  http://gq.net.ru         ICQ:     7272757
 PGP fingerprint: 0628 ACC7 291A D4AA 6D7D  79B8 0641 D82A E3E3 CE1D
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]

Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>:
Bug#462355; Package etckeeper. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Andrei Popescu <andreimpopescu@gmail.com>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #30 received at 462355@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Andrei Popescu <andreimpopescu@gmail.com>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <462355@bugs.debian.org>
Subject: etckeeper: also X11/xorg.conf.* could go to .gitignore
Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2008 12:10:34 +0300
Package: etckeeper
Version: 0.20
Followup-For: Bug #462355


This is too minor to warrant a new bugreport, but IMHO X11/xorg.conf.* 
could also go to .gitignore. The history of xorg.conf is already 
preserved in git, no need to duplicate it.

Regards,
Andrei

-- System Information:
Debian Release: lenny/sid
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)

Kernel: Linux 2.6.25-2-amd64 (SMP w/2 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash

Versions of packages etckeeper depends on:
ii  debconf [debconf-2.0]        1.5.22      Debian configuration management sy
ii  git-core                     1:1.5.6.2-1 fast, scalable, distributed revisi

etckeeper recommends no packages.

-- debconf information:
* etckeeper/commit_failed:




Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org:
Bug#462355; Package etckeeper. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #35 received at 462355@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>
To: Andrei Popescu <andreimpopescu@gmail.com>, 462355@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#462355: etckeeper: also X11/xorg.conf.* could go to .gitignore
Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2008 09:48:34 -0400
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Andrei Popescu wrote:
> This is too minor to warrant a new bugreport, but IMHO X11/xorg.conf.* 
> could also go to .gitignore. The history of xorg.conf is already 
> preserved in git, no need to duplicate it.

I guess you're talking about the xorg.conf.YYYYMMDDHHMMSS backup files
that the postinst can sometimes make? I'd not want to ignore
xorg.conf.*; that could be anything.

-- 
see shy jo
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>:
Bug#462355; Package etckeeper. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Andrei Popescu <andreimpopescu@gmail.com>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #40 received at 462355@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Andrei Popescu <andreimpopescu@gmail.com>
To: Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>
Cc: 462355@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#462355: etckeeper: also X11/xorg.conf.* could go to .gitignore
Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2008 00:40:53 +0300
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
On Sat,12.Jul.08, 09:48:34, Joey Hess wrote:
> Andrei Popescu wrote:
> > This is too minor to warrant a new bugreport, but IMHO X11/xorg.conf.* 
> > could also go to .gitignore. The history of xorg.conf is already 
> > preserved in git, no need to duplicate it.
> 
> I guess you're talking about the xorg.conf.YYYYMMDDHHMMSS backup files
> that the postinst can sometimes make? I'd not want to ignore
> xorg.conf.*; that could be anything.

I usually get them by running dpkg-reconfigure, but yes, this is what I 
thought of.

Regards,
Andrei
-- 
If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.
(Albert Einstein)
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>:
Bug#462355; Package etckeeper. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Florian Weimer <fweimer@bfk.de>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>. Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #45 received at 462355@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Florian Weimer <fweimer@bfk.de>
To: 462355@bugs.debian.org
Subject: What about *.old?
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2008 10:14:36 +0200
On one of my systems, I've got:

#       new file: modules.conf.old
#       new file: openoffice/dictionary.lst.old
#       new file: php5/cli/php.ini.ucf-old
#       new file: reader.conf.old
#       new file: sgml/catalog.old
#       new file: sgml/docbook-xml.cat.old
#       new file: sgml/sgml-data.cat.old
#       new file: xml/catalog.old
#       new file: xml/docbook-xml.xml.old
#       new file: xml/openoffice.org-common.xml.old
#       new file: xml/sgml-data.xml.old
#       new file: xml/xml-core.xml.old

Perhaps *.old files should be ignored, too?

BTW, the default .gitignore file should use "/mtab" instead of plain
"mtab" and so on, to avoid recursion.

-- 
Florian Weimer                <fweimer@bfk.de>
BFK edv-consulting GmbH       http://www.bfk.de/
Kriegsstraße 100              tel: +49-721-96201-1
D-76133 Karlsruhe             fax: +49-721-96201-99




Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>:
Bug#462355; Package etckeeper. (Tue, 10 Nov 2009 01:36:03 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>. (Tue, 10 Nov 2009 01:36:03 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #50 received at 462355@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org>
To: 462355@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug #462355: etckeeper default ignore list
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 01:25:42 +0000
I would also suggest ignoring:

# vipw backups, unnecessary to have in git
/group-
/gshadow-
/passwd-
/shadow-
# the ucf equivalents of dpkg conffile cruft
*.ucf-old
*.ucf-new
*.ucf-dist

Regards,
    Simon




Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org:
Bug#462355; Package etckeeper. (Fri, 25 Dec 2009 19:48:03 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. (Fri, 25 Dec 2009 19:48:03 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #55 received at 462355@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>
To: Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org>, 462355@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#462355: Bug #462355: etckeeper default ignore list
Date: Fri, 25 Dec 2009 14:44:39 -0500
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Simon McVittie wrote:
> # vipw backups, unnecessary to have in git
> /group-
> /gshadow-
> /passwd-
> /shadow-

The reason I have not already ignored those is because administrators
sometimes habitually rely on these files being present. (Ie, when
undoing a change.) And they won't bloat the git repo since they copy
objects already in it.

> # the ucf equivalents of dpkg conffile cruft
> *.ucf-old
> *.ucf-new
> *.ucf-dist

Added.

-- 
see shy jo
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org:
Bug#462355; Package etckeeper. (Tue, 26 Jan 2010 20:33:03 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. (Tue, 26 Jan 2010 20:33:03 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #60 received at 462355@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>
To: 462355@bugs.debian.org
Subject: update on status
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 15:30:15 -0500
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
To summarize, things I have not yet accomplished from this bug:

* Ignore xorg.conf.YYYMMDD type files. I don't want to ignore
  xorg.conf.*, and my ignore syntax is currently very limited
  and does not even support xorg.conf.??????

* Use /mtab to avoid recursively ignoring /etc/foo/mtab. (etc)
  Also not done because while git supports that, it's different for
  the other VCSs.

All the rest is done now, or I have rejected the change.

(Please use new bugs for anything new! :)

-- 
see shy jo
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>:
Bug#462355; Package etckeeper. (Sat, 31 Jul 2010 21:09:03 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Paul Menzel <pm.debian@googlemail.com>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>. (Sat, 31 Jul 2010 21:09:03 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #65 received at 462355@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Paul Menzel <pm.debian@googlemail.com>
To: Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>
Cc: Alexander GQ Gerasiov <gq@cs.msu.su>, 462355@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Bug#462355: Adding LVM files to `.gitignore`
Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2010 23:06:31 +0200
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Am Freitag, den 25.01.2008, 01:16 +0300 schrieb Alexander GQ Gerasiov:
> На Thu, 24 Jan 2008 16:20:15 -0500 Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org> записано:
> 
> > Alexander GQ Gerasiov wrote:
> > > lvm update this information every time you change lvm partitioning.
> > > When you do so, it stores new configuration in backup and moves old
> > > configuration from backup to archive. On host, where I use lvm
> > > snapshots for every-day backup, I see many of such archives.
> > > 
> > > Lets see what is backup files: that's just a _copy_ of metadata,
> > > which could be used in some rear cases. E.g. you lost all your lvm's
> > > metadata. Or to restore the same partitioning on new, replaced
> > > drive. Do we need history for it? Yes (e.g. to restore suddenly
> > > deleted volume), but lvm tracks enough copies of old metadata in
> > > archive dir. So keeping them in git don't needed.
> > 
> > git should automatically notice that the file was renamed from archive
> > to backup, and only save one copy of the file.
> May be, but what for do we need to keep them in vcs? lvm already stores
> every past version there. And every file there should normally have
> only one revision.
> > 
> > My question is, what if I deleted my current /etc and used etckeeper
> > to check out a new copy from git. Would lvm transparently recreate
> > those lvm files as needed, or would it be better if the new /etc
> > checkout included them?
> I don't understand exactly what do you mean. But lvm don't use those
> files for it's normal work. They are only some backups for admin, to
> allow him restore some past lvm configuration. If you check out
> something from vcs lvm would not use this files.

This issues seems still to be unresolved and this bug is still open.
Joey wrote the following in his last message.

	»All the rest is done now, or I have rejected the change.« [1]

Joey, it would be great, if you could respond to Alexander’s answers.


Thanks,

Paul


[1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=462355#60
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org:
Bug#462355; Package etckeeper. (Sun, 01 Aug 2010 18:42:03 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. (Sun, 01 Aug 2010 18:42:03 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #70 received at 462355@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>
To: Paul Menzel <pm.debian@googlemail.com>
Cc: Alexander GQ Gerasiov <gq@cs.msu.su>, 462355@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#462355: Adding LVM files to `.gitignore`
Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2010 14:40:30 -0400
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Paul Menzel wrote:
> This issues seems still to be unresolved and this bug is still open.

No,

etckeeper (0.11) unstable; urgency=low

  * Add lvm cache dir to default ignores. (#462355)

 -- Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>  Mon, 11 Feb 2008 00:43:19 -0500

-- 
see shy jo
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>:
Bug#462355; Package etckeeper. (Mon, 02 Aug 2010 09:00:03 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Paul Menzel <pm.debian@googlemail.com>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>. (Mon, 02 Aug 2010 09:00:03 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #75 received at 462355@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Paul Menzel <pm.debian@googlemail.com>
To: Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>
Cc: Alexander GQ Gerasiov <gq@cs.msu.su>, 462355@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#462355: Adding LVM files to `.gitignore`
Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2010 10:57:25 +0200
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Am Sonntag, den 01.08.2010, 14:40 -0400 schrieb Joey Hess:
> Paul Menzel wrote:
> > This issues seems still to be unresolved and this bug is still open.
> 
> No,
> 
> etckeeper (0.11) unstable; urgency=low
> 
>   * Add lvm cache dir to default ignores. (#462355)
> 
>  -- Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>  Mon, 11 Feb 2008 00:43:19 -0500

Alexander asked about

        lvm/backup
        lvm/archive

too. And reading the discussion, I did not see a definite argument
against adding it.


Thanks,

Paul
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Reply sent to Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>:
You have taken responsibility. (Fri, 18 Mar 2011 21:18:03 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Notification sent to Alexander Gerasiov <gq@cs.msu.su>:
Bug acknowledged by developer. (Fri, 18 Mar 2011 21:18:04 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #80 received at 462355-close@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>
To: 462355-close@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Bug#462355: fixed in etckeeper 0.53
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 21:14:50 +0000
Source: etckeeper
Source-Version: 0.53

We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of
etckeeper, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive:

etckeeper_0.53.dsc
  to main/e/etckeeper/etckeeper_0.53.dsc
etckeeper_0.53.tar.gz
  to main/e/etckeeper/etckeeper_0.53.tar.gz
etckeeper_0.53_all.deb
  to main/e/etckeeper/etckeeper_0.53_all.deb



A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is
attached.

Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed.  If you
have further comments please address them to 462355@bugs.debian.org,
and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate.

Debian distribution maintenance software
pp.
Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org> (supplier of updated etckeeper package)

(This message was generated automatically at their request; if you
believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive
administrators by mailing ftpmaster@debian.org)


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Format: 1.8
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 15:37:54 -0400
Source: etckeeper
Binary: etckeeper
Architecture: source all
Version: 0.53
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>
Changed-By: Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>
Description: 
 etckeeper  - store /etc in git, mercurial, bzr or darcs
Closes: 462355
Changes: 
 etckeeper (0.53) unstable; urgency=low
 .
   [ Joey Hess ]
   * Install bzr hook lazily, clean up some compatibility code. (Jelmer Vernooij)
 .
   [ Josh Triplett ]
   * Only set environment variables for commit authorship (EMAIL,
     GIT_AUTHOR_NAME, GIT_AUTHOR_EMAIL, GIT_COMMITTER_EMAIL) if they don't
     already exist.
 .
   [ Joey Hess ]
   * Add .pyc and .pyo files to ignore.
   * Add lvm/backup and lvm/cache to ignore. Closes: #462355
   * Avoid warning about special or hard linked files that are ignored
     by hg. Thanks Sjoerd Mullender for patch.
     Closes: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=688991
Checksums-Sha1: 
 2568dddd056d9756f54d64ecf54031e9b361303a 1490 etckeeper_0.53.dsc
 0f9d2a2130dae87e8b624210e8556c9480b308c5 44390 etckeeper_0.53.tar.gz
 e7e536c04c9d34f95306ee552413517ad73447ba 34220 etckeeper_0.53_all.deb
Checksums-Sha256: 
 f9d65e027aa5244af8f51bd4cdcb72177d82409bd9f3c96d03dd4bb2c2b83167 1490 etckeeper_0.53.dsc
 5c734e6ca16c6d892372e3aa8e90eb7c40c7416f8c4b40985aab0e4a4cff3808 44390 etckeeper_0.53.tar.gz
 0195d9cf6d30123265e9676fe3c4d389646fc8c2c889e4dd248b22c0d63dffee 34220 etckeeper_0.53_all.deb
Files: 
 6afed68bd171de1d1c9087cfe74bf495 1490 admin optional etckeeper_0.53.dsc
 a5bb4613ce954a03e5db9b9cfff3351a 44390 admin optional etckeeper_0.53.tar.gz
 774898608206cb36a1fda1db504e2b33 34220 admin optional etckeeper_0.53_all.deb

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
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=a0rO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----





Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>:
Bug#462355; Package etckeeper. (Mon, 21 Mar 2011 15:51:13 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Luca Capello <luca@pca.it>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>. (Mon, 21 Mar 2011 15:51:13 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #85 received at 462355@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Luca Capello <luca@pca.it>
To: 462355@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#462355: Adding LVM files to `.gitignore`
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 16:47:04 +0100
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Hi there!

Bcc:ing people involved in lvm2 archive/backup/cache bugs, please excuse
me if you are not anymore interested.

On Sat, 31 Jul 2010 23:06:31 +0200, Paul Menzel wrote:
> Am Freitag, den 25.01.2008, 01:16 +0300 schrieb Alexander GQ Gerasiov:
>> На Thu, 24 Jan 2008 16:20:15 -0500 Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org> записано:
>> > My question is, what if I deleted my current /etc and used etckeeper
>> > to check out a new copy from git. Would lvm transparently recreate
>> > those lvm files as needed, or would it be better if the new /etc
>> > checkout included them?
>> I don't understand exactly what do you mean. But lvm don't use those
>> files for it's normal work. They are only some backups for admin, to
>> allow him restore some past lvm configuration. If you check out
>> something from vcs lvm would not use this files.
>
> This issues seems still to be unresolved and this bug is still open.
> Joey wrote the following in his last message.
>
> 	»All the rest is done now, or I have rejected the change.« [1]
>
> Joey, it would be great, if you could respond to Alexander’s answers.

Well, with the last upload (0.53), etckeeper added all lvm
archive/backup/cache to .gitignore [1].

[1] Joey, the last ChangeLog entry is wrong, s/cache/archive/ since
    lvm/cache was added in version 0.11 already for #462355...

However, according to bugs in the lvm2 package, these files should not
be ignored at all.  The real problem is that different people think
these files do not belong to /etc, while upstream does:

  <http://bugs.debian.org/372207>  
  <http://bugs.debian.org/562234>

Please note that I thought about suggesting the same for etckeeper, but
then ended up filing a bug for lvm2.  My fault that I did not checked
the etckeeper bug list, sorry:

  <http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=612739#5>

Thx, bye,
Gismo / Luca
[Message part 2 (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>:
Bug#462355; Package etckeeper. (Wed, 23 Mar 2011 07:24:03 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Goswin von Brederlow <goswin-v-b@web.de>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>. (Wed, 23 Mar 2011 07:24:03 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #90 received at 462355@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Goswin von Brederlow <goswin-v-b@web.de>
To: Luca Capello <luca@pca.it>
Cc: 462355@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#462355: Adding LVM files to `.gitignore`
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 08:20:39 +0100
Luca Capello <luca@pca.it> writes:

> Hi there!
>
> Bcc:ing people involved in lvm2 archive/backup/cache bugs, please excuse
> me if you are not anymore interested.
>
> On Sat, 31 Jul 2010 23:06:31 +0200, Paul Menzel wrote:
>> Am Freitag, den 25.01.2008, 01:16 +0300 schrieb Alexander GQ Gerasiov:
>>> На Thu, 24 Jan 2008 16:20:15 -0500 Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org> записано:
>>> > My question is, what if I deleted my current /etc and used etckeeper
>>> > to check out a new copy from git. Would lvm transparently recreate
>>> > those lvm files as needed, or would it be better if the new /etc
>>> > checkout included them?
>>> I don't understand exactly what do you mean. But lvm don't use those
>>> files for it's normal work. They are only some backups for admin, to
>>> allow him restore some past lvm configuration. If you check out
>>> something from vcs lvm would not use this files.
>>
>> This issues seems still to be unresolved and this bug is still open.
>> Joey wrote the following in his last message.
>>
>> 	»All the rest is done now, or I have rejected the change.« [1]
>>
>> Joey, it would be great, if you could respond to Alexander’s answers.
>
> Well, with the last upload (0.53), etckeeper added all lvm
> archive/backup/cache to .gitignore [1].
>
> [1] Joey, the last ChangeLog entry is wrong, s/cache/archive/ since
>     lvm/cache was added in version 0.11 already for #462355...
>
> However, according to bugs in the lvm2 package, these files should not
> be ignored at all.  The real problem is that different people think
> these files do not belong to /etc, while upstream does:
>
>   <http://bugs.debian.org/372207>  
>   <http://bugs.debian.org/562234>
>
> Please note that I thought about suggesting the same for etckeeper, but
> then ended up filing a bug for lvm2.  My fault that I did not checked
> the etckeeper bug list, sorry:
>
>   <http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=612739#5>
>
> Thx, bye,
> Gismo / Luca

Just FYI, having those files in /etc gives errors if / is read-only and
they need to be configured to somewhere else for that. So ignored or not
doesn't matter to me as the files aren't there anyway in my
configuration.

On the other hand, if they are present, they represent valuable history
of the LVM metadata. If you screw up and e.g. accidentally delete the
wrong LV then you want those infos to restore it. Imho they are worth
preserving. But they don't need to exist for LVM to function.

I would opt for preserving them.

MfG
        Goswin




Bug archived. Request was from Debbugs Internal Request <owner@bugs.debian.org> to internal_control@bugs.debian.org. (Sat, 30 Apr 2011 08:24:05 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: Fri Apr 18 08:27:24 2014; Machine Name: beach.debian.org

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