[Openstack-devel] cloud-initramfs-tools growroot bug in Debian

[Scott Moser]

the trap is in growpart. from cloud-utils. 

On May 27, 2013, at 10:39 AM, Thomas Goirand <zigo at debian.org> wrote:

> On 05/24/2013 03:52 AM, Scott Moser wrote:
>> This is probably whatever your /bin/sh is doesn't like:
>>  'trap cleanup EXIT'
>> dash, busybox's sh (at least as built by ubuntu in busybox-initramfs and
>> busybox-static), and bash all are OK with that.
> 
> Hi Scott,
> 
> Thanks for your reply, and sorry that it took me so long to reply again.
> I was in fact investigating and working out my own image, which now
> works well (minus what's below, though I have workarounds which work
> already: see below).
> 
> I've searched, and searched again, and didn't find this at all in the
> growpart folder of cloud-initramfs. Is it possible that this is located
> somewhere else, like in:
> overlayroot/scripts/init-bottom/overlayroot
> 
> or in:
> rescuevol/scripts/local-premount/rescuevol
> 
> ???
> 
> It doesn't really make sense to me if it was there, but these are the
> only place where I saw what you are talking about.
> 
> On 05/24/2013 09:25 PM, Scott Moser wrote:
>>>> I dont understand how its dangerous.
>>>> 
>>>> Because if for any reason the output isn't what you
>>>> expect (like it happened to me), then it breaks
>>>> everything.
>> But it did the right thing.  It exited without changing anything.
>> An unexpected error was encountered and it took the safe way out.
> 
> Maybe it's just that I got very frustrated by it, as I spent quite some
> time to find out what happened. So forget it, and forgive me! :)
> 
> I'd appreciate if you help me to fix this trap thing, so it is clean again.
> 
> On 05/24/2013 09:25 PM, Scott Moser wrote:
>>>> please open a bug. i'm not sure what the right way to handle that
>>>> is.
>>>>>> does 'copy_exec' handle using busybox functionality if its there?
>>>> 
>>>> I don't think so. If I produce a patch that does a
>>>> dpkg-vendor --derive-from ubuntu to handle this
>>>> gracefully, will you accept it?
>> A initramfs build-time change would be fine, maybe we should file a
>> bug / feature request for initramfs to be able to determine this in a
>> clean way.
> 
> For the moment, I have this as a debian quilt patch. I will try to
> produce something cleaner later on, so that you only have a patch to
> apply, and then I'll open such bug (I don't want to consume your time
> for Debian-specific things...).
> 
> On 05/24/2013 09:25 PM, Scott Moser wrote:
>>> p.s: any news from the live-build thing we discussed
>>>> earlier? Because you didn't answer, I just built a
>>>> small script instead of using live-build, but I
>>>> really wish we could unify our efforts, merge your
>>>> work into live-build 4.x, etc.
>> I thought I had replied, sorry.
>> Our build system works, and is very low maintenance.  The only
>> significant effort we had over the past 4 years was in moving from
>> vm-builder to live-build.
> 
> You did reply, then we've talked about the fact that you had some
> specific patches to live-build which were not documented anywhere, and
> then you said you would. That's were we are at at the moment.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Thomas Goirand (zigo)
>