Logrotate is noisy with: Re-opening all log files
Affects | Status | Importance | Assigned to | Milestone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GNU Mailman |
Undecided
|
Unassigned | ||
| mailman (Ubuntu) |
Undecided
|
Unassigned | ||
| Hardy |
Undecided
|
Unassigned |
Bug Description
Binary package hint: mailman
When logrotate runs for mailman you get this:
/etc/cron.
Re-opening all log files
Re-opening all log files
It calls mailmanctl reopen. If it called it with a -q it would be quiet.
IMPACT: when rotating the mailman logfiles, 'mailmanctl reopen' is called
from /etc/logrotate.
For every call, mailman prints message "Re-opening all log files", which
gets sent to the user in a (useless) email.
This was fixed upstream in mailman 2.1.9-10 and Karmic has 2.1.12-2.
TEST CASE:
- install mailman (apt-get install mailman)
- create the default mailman list with the following command:
newlist mailman
- start mailman (/etc/init.
files in /var/log/mailman
- force a logrotate of these files by running:
logrotate -f /etc/logrotate.
- you should see the following output:
root@utest-
Re-opening all log files
Re-opening all log files
This is called from crontab so there will be an email sent to users every
time.
- install the patched version, and run the above command again, it should
be quiet, without any messages.
REGRESSION POTENTIAL: low. According to the mailmanctl help page:
-q/--quiet
Don't print status messages. Error messages are still printed to
standard error.
By applying this patch, users will not get the informational messages
but they will still get any error message.
Related branches
pearcec (christian-pearcec) wrote : | #1 |
Matthias Andree (matthias-andree) wrote : | #3 |
Hm... 8.04 LTS Server (Hardy) doesn't seem to have that fix yet.
Stas Sușcov (sushkov) wrote : | #4 |
Fix released... Not in hardy!
$apt-cache policy mailman
mailman:
Installed: 1:2.1.9-9ubuntu1
Candidate: 1:2.1.9-9ubuntu1
...
Serge van Ginderachter (svg) wrote : | #5 |
This bug is not resolved as the fixe was not released to LTS.
Petri Koistinen (pkoistin) wrote : | #6 |
What does this "Declined for Hardy by Thierry Carrez" means, what is the reasoning behind declining this update to hardy (8.04 LTS) release?
Petri Koistinen (pkoistin) wrote : | #7 |
Changed in mailman (Ubuntu): | |
assignee: | nobody → Thierry Carrez (ttx) |
status: | Fix Released → Incomplete |
Thierry Carrez (ttx) wrote : | #8 |
Bug is fix released in the current development version.
Bug was rejected for hardy SRU since stable release updates are here to address "high-impact" bugs, and during review this was not considered to be high-impact.
See https:/
Changed in mailman (Ubuntu): | |
assignee: | Thierry Carrez (ttx) → nobody |
status: | Incomplete → Fix Released |
Petri Koistinen (pkoistin) wrote : | #9 |
I think this fits just fine to this definition:
* Bugs which do not fit under above categories, but (1) have an obviously safe patch and (2) affect an application rather than critical infrastructure packages (like X.org or the kernel).
Changed in mailman (Ubuntu): | |
status: | Fix Released → Incomplete |
assignee: | nobody → Thierry Carrez (ttx) |
Thierry Carrez (ttx) wrote : | #10 |
Approved, please follow https:/
Changed in mailman (Ubuntu): | |
status: | Incomplete → Triaged |
assignee: | Thierry Carrez (ttx) → nobody |
Petri Koistinen (pkoistin) wrote : | #11 |
It seems that I can't use "Nominate for release" as this has been previously declined for Hardy.
Changed in mailman (Ubuntu): | |
status: | Triaged → Fix Released |
Thierry Carrez (ttx) wrote : | #12 |
@Petri: I thought I had nominated/approved it. Done now, sorry for the noise.
Imre Gergely (cemc) wrote : | #14 |
I've updated the bug description with some details for a SRU and I've tested the patch provided by pearcec and it's working as expected.
description: | updated |
description: | updated |
description: | updated |
Scott Moser (smoser) wrote : | #16 |
Imre,
Thanks for the debdiff.
I'm not able to sponsor this, but looked at the patch, and it is an exact backport of the commit to debian/
at [1]. I can +1 the patch.
Accepted mailman into hardy-proposed, the package will build now and be available in a few hours. Please test and give feedback here. See https:/
Changed in mailman (Ubuntu Hardy): | |
status: | New → Fix Committed |
tags: | added: verification-needed |
Imre Gergely (cemc) wrote : | #18 |
Did the test case and everythings seems ok.
root@utest-hhs32:~# apt-cache policy mailman
mailman:
Installed: 1:2.1.9-9ubuntu1.2
Candidate: 1:2.1.9-9ubuntu1.2
Version table:
*** 1:2.1.9-9ubuntu1.2 0
500 http://
100 /var/lib/
1:
500 http://
1:
500 http://
root@utest-hhs32:~# ls -la /var/log/mailman/
total 12
drwxrws--- 2 root list 4096 2010-12-15 16:36 .
drwxr-xr-x 11 root root 4096 2010-12-15 16:33 ..
-rw-rw-r-- 1 list list 0 2010-12-15 16:34 error
-rw-rw-r-- 1 list list 729 2010-12-15 16:34 qrunner
root@utest-hhs32:~# logrotate -f /etc/logrotate.
root@utest-hhs32:~# ls -la /var/log/mailman/
total 16
drwxrws--- 2 root list 4096 2010-12-15 16:36 .
drwxr-xr-x 11 root root 4096 2010-12-15 16:33 ..
-rw-rw-r-- 1 list list 0 2010-12-15 16:36 error
-rw-rw-r-- 1 list list 0 2010-12-15 16:34 error.1
-rw-rw-r-- 1 list list 729 2010-12-15 16:36 qrunner
-rw-rw-r-- 1 list list 1458 2010-12-15 16:36 qrunner.1
tags: |
added: verification-done removed: verification-needed |
Launchpad Janitor (janitor) wrote : | #19 |
This bug was fixed in the package mailman - 1:2.1.9-9ubuntu1.2
---------------
mailman (1:2.1.
* debian/
files (LP: #244233)
-- Imre Gergely <email address hidden> Tue, 07 Dec 2010 23:44:02 +0200
Changed in mailman (Ubuntu Hardy): | |
status: | Fix Committed → Fix Released |
This has been fixed since 1:2.1.9-10