0003701: Upgrading pkgutil with -y fails and leaves system without pkgutil

(0006233)
bonivart (developer)
2009-06-01 09:51

Thanks for reporting that, I usually don't use -y myself because I want to see everything looking for bugs but of course there was one related to -y! :-)

I'll see what I will do about this, I'm thinking two things, either keep the admin file around somehow (not really nice if you permanently remove the package) or simply checking for its existence before using it, the latter would in practice temporarily disable -y until the admin file is back again.

(0006234)
skayser (administrator)
2009-06-01 11:59

Your second option seems like a good option. Straight-forward and fully sufficient in the seldom case of a pkgutil upgrade (with its admin file removal).

(0006239)
bonivart (developer)
2009-06-01 16:50

I went with the second option, it seemed the simplest. I will release 1.6.1 shortly, hopefully not that many will use -y to upgrade to it... :-)

http://pkgutil.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/pkgutil/trunk/pkgutil?revision=55 [^]

(0006271)
dam (administrator)
2009-06-05 10:00

This is not good. If you upgrade a machine which receives updates only once every few month you have almost always an update of pkgutil and also many many packages. Just not using a removed admin file renders -y useless in these scenarios. It would be better to copy the admin file somewhere on pkgutil start, use it during pkgutil runtime, and remove it after that. That way removing admin from the package wouldn't interfere with package installation.

Additionally, there should be a special case which always updated pkgutil first and restarts it, so in case of an error the error is fixable. Currently using -y leaves a machine completely broken as packages are downloaded, removed, but not installed as the admin file was missing. So lots of packages are removed and not installed again.

(0006272)
bonivart (developer)
2009-06-05 10:29

At least for interactive it's no worse than having to confirm for pkgutil, right? If you're running from cron or something it would halt.

I kept it on my todo-list but I wanted a quick fix for those like Sebastian who ended up without pkgutil.

(0006273)
dam (administrator)
2009-06-05 11:15

It is worse. Because it deinstalls all upgradeable packages and instead of installing the packages it throws errors. So you end up without all packages to be upgraded and without trace which packages got deinstalled.

(0006274)
bonivart (developer)
2009-06-05 11:24

No, read the code. :-) It actually removes/installs the packages one by one so all packages up to pkgutil will be upgraded.

But I agree with you that it's not how I want things to be, your idea with copying the admin file at start sounds interesting...

(0006275)
bonivart (developer)
2009-06-05 15:13

Please try r59 if you have a chance, it copies the admin file like you suggested Dago.

http://pkgutil.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/pkgutil/trunk/pkgutil?revision=59 [^]

(0006288)
bonivart (developer)
2009-06-09 10:00

v1.6.1 released.

Notes
(0006233) bonivart (developer) 2009-06-01 09:51	Thanks for reporting that, I usually don't use -y myself because I want to see everything looking for bugs but of course there was one related to -y! :-) I'll see what I will do about this, I'm thinking two things, either keep the admin file around somehow (not really nice if you permanently remove the package) or simply checking for its existence before using it, the latter would in practice temporarily disable -y until the admin file is back again.

(0006234) skayser (administrator) 2009-06-01 11:59	Your second option seems like a good option. Straight-forward and fully sufficient in the seldom case of a pkgutil upgrade (with its admin file removal).

(0006239) bonivart (developer) 2009-06-01 16:50	I went with the second option, it seemed the simplest. I will release 1.6.1 shortly, hopefully not that many will use -y to upgrade to it... :-) http://pkgutil.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/pkgutil/trunk/pkgutil?revision=55 [^]

(0006271) dam (administrator) 2009-06-05 10:00	This is not good. If you upgrade a machine which receives updates only once every few month you have almost always an update of pkgutil and also many many packages. Just not using a removed admin file renders -y useless in these scenarios. It would be better to copy the admin file somewhere on pkgutil start, use it during pkgutil runtime, and remove it after that. That way removing admin from the package wouldn't interfere with package installation. Additionally, there should be a special case which always updated pkgutil first and restarts it, so in case of an error the error is fixable. Currently using -y leaves a machine completely broken as packages are downloaded, removed, but not installed as the admin file was missing. So lots of packages are removed and not installed again.

(0006272) bonivart (developer) 2009-06-05 10:29	At least for interactive it's no worse than having to confirm for pkgutil, right? If you're running from cron or something it would halt. I kept it on my todo-list but I wanted a quick fix for those like Sebastian who ended up without pkgutil.

(0006273) dam (administrator) 2009-06-05 11:15	It is worse. Because it deinstalls all upgradeable packages and instead of installing the packages it throws errors. So you end up without all packages to be upgraded and without trace which packages got deinstalled.

(0006274) bonivart (developer) 2009-06-05 11:24	No, read the code. :-) It actually removes/installs the packages one by one so all packages up to pkgutil will be upgraded. But I agree with you that it's not how I want things to be, your idea with copying the admin file at start sounds interesting...

(0006275) bonivart (developer) 2009-06-05 15:13	Please try r59 if you have a chance, it copies the admin file like you suggested Dago. http://pkgutil.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/pkgutil/trunk/pkgutil?revision=59 [^]

(0006288) bonivart (developer) 2009-06-09 10:00	v1.6.1 released.

Relationships

OpenCSW Bug Tracker