View Issue Details

IDProjectCategoryView StatusLast Update
0008637Talerexchangepublic2024-04-15 19:32
ReporterFlorian Dold Assigned ToChristian Grothoff Resolution deadline
ImplementerReviewer 
Release signed byDeployed by 
VerifierCommunicator 
Data protection authority notification requiredNo  
CSIRT notification requiredNo  
Estimated effort (hours)Actual effort (hours)0 
Fast-trackNo
Work packagenone
PriorityhighSeverityminorReproducibilityhave not tried
Status closedResolutionno change required 
Target Version0.10Fixed in Version0.10 
Summary0008637: weird logs during exchange Debian package upgrade
DescriptionNot sure if that is expected or if we're doing something wrong with setting up the systemd units.

Setting up taler-exchange (0.9.4-2) ...
taler-exchange-aggregator.service is a disabled or a static unit not running, not starting it.
taler-exchange-closer.service is a disabled or a static unit not running, not starting it.
taler-exchange-expire.service is a disabled or a static unit not running, not starting it.
taler-exchange-httpd.service is a disabled or a static unit not running, not starting it.
taler-exchange-httpd.socket is a disabled or a static unit not running, not starting it.
taler-exchange-secmod-cs.service is a disabled or a static unit not running, not starting it.
taler-exchange-secmod-eddsa.service is a disabled or a static unit not running, not starting it.
taler-exchange-secmod-rsa.service is a disabled or a static unit not running, not starting it.
taler-exchange-transfer.service is a disabled or a static unit not running, not starting it.
taler-exchange-wirewatch.service is a disabled or a static unit not running, not starting it.
TagsNo tags attached.

Required notifications

Address or linkRemarkAdded byNotifiedActions

Activities

Christian Grothoff

2024-03-13 19:18

manager   ~0021902

Well, we very explicitly configured the Debian package to NOT start the services, so this is very much expected. The reason is that we expect the admin to first set up or migrate the DB manually and THEN restart the services.

Florian Dold

2024-03-13 19:34

manager   ~0021903

But the services *are* running, that's why I think the logs are confusing.

Florian Dold

2024-03-13 19:35

manager   ~0021904

Maybe this is just a "false positive warning" because the *target* is indeed enabled, while the individual services units are not enabled?

Christian Grothoff

2024-04-08 17:45

manager   ~0022158

I've checked, this seems to be perfectly normal given that we explicitly do dh_installsystemd with --no-start, --no-enable, --no-stop-on-upgrade.

Issue History

Date ModifiedUsernameFieldChange
2024-03-13 17:38Florian DoldNew Issue
2024-03-13 17:38Florian DoldStatusnew => assigned
2024-03-13 17:38Florian DoldAssigned To => Christian Grothoff
2024-03-13 19:18Christian GrothoffNote Added: 0021902
2024-03-13 19:18Christian GrothoffAssigned ToChristian Grothoff => Florian Dold
2024-03-13 19:18Christian GrothoffStatusassigned => feedback
2024-03-13 19:34Florian DoldNote Added: 0021903
2024-03-13 19:35Florian DoldNote Added: 0021904
2024-03-13 19:35Florian DoldAssigned ToFlorian Dold => Christian Grothoff
2024-04-08 17:45Christian GrothoffStatusfeedback => informing
2024-04-08 17:45Christian GrothoffResolutionopen => fixed
2024-04-08 17:45Christian GrothoffNote Added: 0022158
2024-04-08 17:45Christian GrothoffResolutionfixed => no change required
2024-04-08 17:45Christian GrothoffFixed in Version => 0.10
2024-04-15 19:32Christian GrothoffStatusinforming => closed