eucalyptus-common 2.0+bzr1241-0ubuntu4 not configured after package upgrade
| Affects | Status | Importance | Assigned to | Milestone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Eucalyptus |
Invalid
|
Undecided
|
Unassigned | ||
| eucalyptus (Ubuntu) |
Invalid
|
Undecided
|
Unassigned | ||
Bug Description
apt-get update, apt-get upgrade failed with following errors on maverick beta installed as EUC node:
Setting up eucalyptus-common (2.0+bzr1241-
chown: changing ownership of `/var/lib/
dpkg: error processing eucalyptus-common (--configure):
subprocess installed post-installation script returned error exit status 1
dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of eucalyptus-gl:
eucalyptus-gl depends on eucalyptus-common; however:
Package eucalyptus-common is not configured yet.
dpkg: error processing eucalyptus-gl (--configure):
dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of eucalyptus-nc:
eucalyptus-nc depends on eucalyptus-common; however:
Package eucalyptus-common is not configured yet.
eucalyptus-nc depends on eucalyptus-gl; however:
Package eucalyptus-gl is not configured yet.
dpkg: error processing eucalyptus-nc (--configure):
dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
No apport report written because the error message indicates its a followup error from a previous failure.
No apport report written because the error message indicates its a followup error from a previous failure.
rrors were encountered while processing:
eucalyptus-common
eucalyptus-gl
eucalyptus-nc
removing and reinstalling gives same error.
| flashydave (dave-opensourcesolutions) wrote | #1 |
| flashydave (dave-opensourcesolutions) wrote | #2 |
| Changed in eucalyptus: | |
| status: | New → Invalid |
| C de-Avillez (hggdh2) wrote | #3 |
| Changed in eucalyptus (Ubuntu): | |
| status: | New → Invalid |
I have tracked the problem down to an unrelated mounted read-only dir that I had within /var/lib/eucalyptus tree for which root did not have permissions to chown -R as per line 44 of the postinst srcipt. This caused the script to fail. I guess it can therefore be considered self-inflicted.
Having said that it does show there is a minor problem within the upstart script called from the postinst script returning the message
start: Unknown parameter: IFACE
The line that generates this appears to be line 8 of the upstart job
/etc/init/
which has the string
instance $IFACE
I havent investigated what this does yet.
This doesnt stop the postinst script completing with an exit code of 0