[Bug 1002357] Re: sort out udev rules madness (3 editions installed into 4 files)

[Steve Langasek]

Hello Dmitrijs, or anyone else affected,

Accepted mdadm into precise-proposed. The package will build now and be
available at http://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mdadm/3.2.5-1ubuntu0.1
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: mdadm (Ubuntu Precise)
       Status: In Progress => Fix Committed

** Tags added: verification-needed

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Foundations Bugs, which is subscribed to mdadm in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1002357

Title:
  sort out udev rules madness (3 editions installed into 4 files)

Status in “mdadm” package in Ubuntu:
  Fix Released
Status in “mdadm” source package in Precise:
  Fix Committed
Status in “mdadm” source package in Quantal:
  Fix Released

Bug description:
  [IMPACT]

   * Previously 3 different versions of udev rules where installed into
  4 places (2 in the deb and 2 in the udeb)

   * This causes confusion, as multiple mdadm rules are run. It is not
  clear to the system administrator which udev rule to override in
  /etc/. It is even more confusing for remastering udebs, as different
  udev rule was needed to be overridden there.

   * The solution is to use a single matching name udev rule in both deb
  and udeb

   * The upstream udev rule was chosen to be used as described in the
  bug 968074

  [TESTCASE #1]

   * Unpack old deb and udeb into a temporary directory and execute a
  command similar to this:

  $ find quantal/ -name '*.rules' | xargs -L 1 md5sum

   * Expected output is 4 files and 3 unique hashes

   * Unpack new deb and udeb into a temporary directory and execute the
  same command:

  $ find precise-proposed/ -name '*.rules' | xargs -L 1 md5sum

   * Expected output is 2 files with identical hashes

  [TESTCASE #2]

  * With previous release DDF or IMSM RAID arrays are not assembled
  * With new release they are assembled

  [Regression Potential]

   * Same as in the bug 968074,  the default udev rule has changed.
  Users who relied on the previous, incomplete/broken, udev rules may be
  pleasantly surprised or annoyed that the udev rule name has changed to
  match the one of Debian and upstream.

   * System administrators need to check their /etc/udev/rules.d/ to
  make sure that (a) they do not override mdadm rules (b) if they do,
  check that those overrides are still needed (c) that the override is
  named to match the new udev rule name.

  [Other Info]

  # Checksums and names of the old udev rules
  $ find quantal/debian/ -name '*.rules' | xargs -L 1 md5sum
  e143161798744026d7e4aac78e0bfede  quantal/debian/mdadm/lib/udev/rules.d/65-mdadm-blkid.rules
  916ce910a5829a0026a5b8bb3861c935  quantal/debian/mdadm/lib/udev/rules.d/85-mdadm.rules
  6df86db16655769fa94086d3ee13453a  quantal/debian/mdadm-udeb/lib/udev/rules.d/64-md-raid.rules
  e143161798744026d7e4aac78e0bfede  quantal/debian/mdadm-udeb/etc/udev/rules.d/65-mdadm-blkid.rules

  $ Checksum, name and locations of the new udev rule
  6df86db16655769fa94086d3ee13453a  sid/debian/mdadm/lib/udev/rules.d/64-md-raid.rules
  6df86db16655769fa94086d3ee13453a  sid/debian/mdadm-udeb/lib/udev/rules.d/64-md-raid.rules

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mdadm/+bug/1002357/+subscriptions