Bug #16568

Make writing persistence.conf.bak more robust

Added by intrigeri 2019-03-17 08:39:00 . Updated 2019-05-06 18:15:36 .

Status:
Resolved
Priority:
Normal
Assignee:
Category:
Persistence
Target version:
Tails_3.13.2
Start date:
2019-03-17
Due date:
% Done:

100%

Feature Branch:
t-p-s:bugfix/16568-more-robust-backup, bugfix/16568-more-robust-backup
Type of work:
Code
Blueprint:

Starter:
Affected tool:
Deliverable for:

Description

… as suggested on Bug #16461#note-13:

  • I’ve checked and indeed, it would make sense to sync that file after copying.
  • The chattr part is not needed as long as 1. t-p-s sync’s the file; 2. t-p-s is the only component that modifies that file (which is the case currently). But I guess it wouldn’t hurt and who knows, something else might start modifying that file at some point. Let’s do it.

Subtasks

Related issues

Related to Tails - Feature #14544: Spend software developer time on smallish UX improvements In Progress 2018-08-31
Related to Tails - Bug #16461: Backup persistence.conf before modifying it in t-p-s Resolved 2019-02-12
Blocks Tails - Feature #16209: Core work: Foundations Team Confirmed

History

#1 Updated by intrigeri 2019-03-17 08:39:18

#2 Updated by intrigeri 2019-03-17 08:39:31

  • related to Feature #14544: Spend software developer time on smallish UX improvements added

#3 Updated by intrigeri 2019-03-17 08:39:49

  • related to Bug #16461: Backup persistence.conf before modifying it in t-p-s added

#4 Updated by intrigeri 2019-03-17 08:41:06

  • Priority changed from Elevated to Normal

#5 Updated by intrigeri 2019-04-26 13:25:25

  • Status changed from Confirmed to In Progress
  • Feature Branch set to t-p-s:bugfix/16568-more-robust-backup, bugfix/16568-more-robust-backup

#6 Updated by intrigeri 2019-04-28 07:46:34

  • Assignee deleted (intrigeri)
  • QA Check set to Ready for QA

Relevant test suite scenarios pass.

anonym, segfault, anyone up for a review? I expect it’ll be a cursory one, as usual for our Perl code.

#7 Updated by segfault 2019-04-28 15:49:17

  • Status changed from In Progress to Fix committed
  • QA Check changed from Ready for QA to Pass

LGTM. I merged the t-p-s branch. I see you created a patch on bugfix/16568-more-robust-backup. I assume you want to use that until we release a new t-p-s version? If so I would merge the branch in to stable and skip releasing a new t-p-s version.

#8 Updated by segfault 2019-04-28 15:51:54

  • Status changed from Fix committed to In Progress
  • Assignee set to segfault
  • QA Check changed from Pass to Ready for QA

#9 Updated by intrigeri 2019-04-28 19:07:20

  • Assignee changed from segfault to intrigeri
  • QA Check changed from Ready for QA to Dev Needed

> LGTM. I merged the t-p-s branch.

@segfault, thank you.

> I see you created a patch on bugfix/16568-more-robust-backup. I assume you want to use that until we release a new t-p-s version? If so I would merge the branch in to stable and skip releasing a new t-p-s version.

I’d rather not ship 3.14 with this patch in tails.git: it makes it harder to analyze what code we shipped in which Tails version. So I’ll release a new t-p-s, will upload to the topic branch’s APT overlay, and drop the patch. Then I’ll merge into stable. Shout if this does not make sense :)

#10 Updated by intrigeri 2019-04-30 09:54:50

  • Status changed from In Progress to Fix committed
  • % Done changed from 0 to 100

Applied in changeset commit:tails|232e603ec2975bd62e3ea09a1366a929fe601934.

#11 Updated by intrigeri 2019-04-30 09:55:33

  • Assignee deleted (intrigeri)
  • QA Check changed from Dev Needed to Pass

That’s 2.1.1-1.

#12 Updated by intrigeri 2019-05-05 08:23:52

  • Target version changed from Tails_3.14 to Tails_3.13.2

#13 Updated by anonym 2019-05-06 15:00:26

  • Status changed from Fix committed to Resolved

#14 Updated by anonym 2019-05-06 15:03:11

  • Target version changed from Tails_3.13.2 to Tails_3.14

#15 Updated by intrigeri 2019-05-06 18:15:36

  • Target version changed from Tails_3.14 to Tails_3.13.2