From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a01:7e0:0:424::9]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7007E1FF170 for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2025 14:28:34 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 6BCF51DC24; Thu, 7 Aug 2025 14:30:07 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <86af5762-5b31-4000-8180-5ea64103b442@proxmox.com> Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2025 14:29:34 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird To: Proxmox VE development discussion , Stoiko Ivanov References: <20250806110251.2117322-1-s.ivanov@proxmox.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Fiona Ebner In-Reply-To: <20250806110251.2117322-1-s.ivanov@proxmox.com> X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1754569752098 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.024 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH manager v2] 8 to 9 checks: do not ask bootctl if systemd-boot is used. X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Proxmox VE development discussion Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com Sender: "pve-devel" Am 06.08.25 um 1:03 PM schrieb Stoiko Ivanov: > get systemd-boot installed to /boot/efi upon upgrade What problems does this cause (except for the false positive)? Can/do users need to do something to recover? If yes, I think we should have the script output more information. > @@ -1624,18 +1624,11 @@ sub check_bootloader { > } > } else { > if (-f "/usr/share/doc/systemd-boot/changelog.Debian.gz") { > - my $exit_code = eval { > - run_command(['bootctl', 'is-installed', '--quiet', '--graceful'], noerr => 1); > - }; > - if ($exit_code != 0) { > - log_warn( > - "systemd-boot meta-package installed but the system does not seem to use it" > - . " for booting. This can cause problems on upgrades of other boot-related packages." > - . " Consider removing 'systemd-boot'"); > - } else { > - log_info("systemd-boot used as bootloader and fitting meta-package installed."); > - return; > - } > + log_warn( > + "systemd-boot meta-package installed. This can cause problems on upgrades of other" > + ." boot-related packages. Unless you manually setup the system to use" > + ." systemd-boot remove 'systemd-boot'"); > + return; Note that we did not return in the 'if' branch previously, which means the next check below won't be done anymore. Is that intentional? It seems like it should be done. > } > if (!-f "/usr/share/doc/grub-efi-amd64/changelog.Debian.gz") { > log_warn("System booted in uefi mode but grub-efi-amd64 meta-package not installed," _______________________________________________ pve-devel mailing list pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel