mountall(8) man page does not list any of the 9 available options.

Bug #805509 reported by James Hunt on 2011-07-04
20
This bug affects 2 people
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
mountall (Ubuntu)
Wishlist
Unassigned
Precise
Low
Unassigned

Bug Description

[Impact]
mountall's manpage doesn't document its usage. Since we're doing an SRU anyway, this is straightforward to fix. We should have good documentation for the system core.

[Test Case]
Run 'man mountall'. See if the commandline options are documented.

[Regression potential]
The increased size of the manpage may cause a 300 femtosecond increase in the runtime of the man-db trigger.

The man page for mountall is too brief. There are currently 9 command-line options to mountall, but none are specified in mountall(8).

This bug is raised to add all the available options. Run, "mountall --help" to see them.

Related branches

James Hunt (jamesodhunt) on 2011-07-04
tags: added: bitesize
Chad Dunlap (cldunlap1) wrote :

I will take this bug. I figure this is fairly safe for my first bug, but I am all ears for anyone that would like to offer advice.

Changed in mountall (Ubuntu):
assignee: nobody → Chad Dunlap (cldunlap1)
Chad Dunlap (cldunlap1) on 2011-07-23
Changed in mountall (Ubuntu):
status: New → In Progress
Chad Dunlap (cldunlap1) wrote :

I have added the fix per the bug report and committed the fix for review.

Changed in mountall (Ubuntu):
status: In Progress → Fix Committed
Benjamin Kerensa (bkerensa) wrote :

@Chad Dunlap:

Can you please link a merge or submit a patch? I dont see any fix committed to any vcs.

Changed in mountall (Ubuntu):
status: Fix Committed → New
Adam Gleichsner (gleichsnerd) wrote :

Well it looks like this bug is still out there, so I'll take a crack at it.
Coincidentally enough, it's my first one too.

Changed in mountall (Ubuntu):
assignee: Chad Dunlap (cldunlap1) → Adam Gleichsner (gleichsnerd)
status: New → In Progress
Changed in mountall (Ubuntu):
status: In Progress → Fix Committed
Adam Gleichsner (gleichsnerd) wrote :

Added the pizzazz to the man page and committed. The link to the fix is above under Related Branches, and it's now waiting for review.

Bon appetit!

Micah Gersten (micahg) wrote :

Just waiting on info in the merge proposal before sponsoring.

Changed in mountall (Ubuntu Precise):
assignee: Adam Gleichsner (gleichsnerd) → nobody
importance: Undecided → Wishlist
status: Fix Committed → Triaged
Adam Gleichsner (gleichsnerd) wrote :

Sorry for the delay; hardware problems put me out of commission for awhile.

The branch has been resubmitted.

Changed in mountall (Ubuntu):
status: Triaged → Fix Committed
Launchpad Janitor (janitor) wrote :

This bug was fixed in the package mountall - 2.38

---------------
mountall (2.38) unstable; urgency=low

  * Counterproductively document in debian/copyright the license of files in
    intl that form no part of the binary package, to get through the Debian
    NEW queue.

 -- Steve Langasek <email address hidden> Sat, 30 Jun 2012 11:44:59 -0700

Changed in mountall (Ubuntu):
status: Fix Committed → Fix Released
Psi-Jack (erenfro) wrote :

This isn't "fixed". It's bandaided to change the copyright, author,and bugs to, but does not actually document the tool at all.

Mountall in Ubuntu is custom unique to Ubuntu to work specifically with upstart, and these need to be documented properly on how it operates, what it emits, how it emits, so people can properly make upstart-related scripts for them, so long Ubuntu continues to support & build upstart.

Not to mention, the actual bug subject said that the manpage doesn't list any of the 9 options available from --help in it, and that clearly is still not in either.

no longer affects: lucid

On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 11:10:57PM -0000, Psi-Jack wrote:
> This isn't "fixed".

Yes, it is, contrary to the unhelpful autogenerated bug closure message from
Launchpad. It was fixed in mountall 2.37:

mountall (2.37) unstable; urgency=low

[...]

  [ Adam Gleichsner ]
  * Add options to mountall(8) manual page. LP: #805509.

> Not to mention, the actual bug subject said that the manpage doesn't
> list any of the 9 options available from --help in it, and that clearly
> is still not in either.

I don't think you're looking at the right version of the package.

Steve Langasek (vorlon) on 2012-11-08
description: updated
Changed in mountall (Ubuntu Precise):
importance: Wishlist → Low

Hello James, or anyone else affected,

Accepted mountall into precise-proposed. The package will build now and be available at http://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mountall/2.36.1 in a few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.

Please help us by testing this new package. See https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation how to enable and use -proposed. Your feedback will aid us getting this update out to other Ubuntu users.

If this package fixes the bug for you, please change the bug tag from verification-needed to verification-done. If it does not, change the tag to verification-failed. In either case, details of your testing will help us make a better decision.

Further information regarding the verification process can be found at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/PerformingSRUVerification . Thank you in advance!

Changed in mountall (Ubuntu Precise):
status: Triaged → Fix Committed
tags: added: verification-needed
Adam Conrad (adconrad) wrote :

Hello James, or anyone else affected,

Accepted mountall into precise-proposed. The package will build now and be available at http://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mountall/2.36.2 in a few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.

Please help us by testing this new package. See https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation how to enable and use -proposed. Your feedback will aid us getting this update out to other Ubuntu users.

If this package fixes the bug for you, please change the bug tag from verification-needed to verification-done. If it does not, change the tag to verification-failed. In either case, details of your testing will help us make a better decision.

Further information regarding the verification process can be found at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/PerformingSRUVerification . Thank you in advance!

Rolf Leggewie (r0lf) wrote :

This was fixed in 2.36.1 but the ticket wasn't ever properly set to "Fix Released" which I will do now.

Changed in mountall (Ubuntu Precise):
status: Fix Committed → Fix Released
To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  Edit
Everyone can see this information.

Other bug subscribers