FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Debian > Debian dpkg

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 07-12-2012, 08:44 AM
Goswin von Brederlow
 
Default BinNMU changelog handling for Multi-Arch: same packages

On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 08:59:38AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Jul 2012, Guillem Jover wrote:
> > On Wed, 2012-07-11 at 09:23:05 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > > 2/ we modify dpkg to allow co-installation of M-A: same packages which share the
> > > same source version regardless of the binary version
> >
> > As I've said before, this right here seems unacceptable. This implies
> > at least:
> >
> > * loosing the binNMU changelog entry, with a version in the changelog
> > not matching the one on the dpkg db (in possibly both directions).
> > * making installed file contents flip-flop depending on what package
> > got installed last.
> > * making dpkg unable to detect different generated file contents on
> > different binary rebuilds.
>
> There's a mis-understanding here. I was not telling to drop the check
> that ensures that the files are identical between the various arches.
> Instead I'm just saying that we must change the check that ensures that
> all package are at the same version to use the source version and not the
> binary version.
>
> And this is required even if we move the changelog to control.tar.
> Otherwise the release team will still have to bin-nmu all arches at the
> same time, which is what they would like to avoid.

In the interim till this is solved properly, and this might be from
till wheezy up to as long as wheezy+1 if things go bad, may I suggest
the following:

* For the instability of a package from different architectures the
source version counts. A bin-NMU version does not conflict with
a normal version.
* Frontends put a high value on trying to match versions. If arch1
is updated to a bin-NMU then arch2 will be updated to the same bin-NMU
too where available.

Those two will have to happen, as Raphael says, no matter what the
changelog solution will eventually be to allow the release team to
only bin-NMU some archs for MA packages. So we might as well do that
now.

* File conflicts in /usr/share/doc/<package>/ between packages of the same
source version are ignored. This could be even further limited to
changelogs.

Yes, this is huge hack, a violation of layering, yada yada yada. But it
is simply the easiest quick fix. And since programs must not rely on
/usr/share/doc/<package> to be available any inconsistencies there will
be harmless.

It also preserves the changelog entries in packages so apt-listchanges
can display it and has no efect on non-multiarch systems.

MfG
Goswin


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-dpkg-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120712084455.GB25594@frosties
 
Old 07-12-2012, 02:50 PM
Philipp Kern
 
Default BinNMU changelog handling for Multi-Arch: same packages

On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 08:59:38AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > > 3/ we modify sbuild to add the required "binary-only=yes" in the binNMU
> > > changelog entries. Here's a sample header line:
> > > ftplib (3.1-1-9+b1) unstable; urgency=low, binary-only=yes
> > This could be done regardless if the buildd people agree to it, and that
> > was the idea when I added this.
> Filed a bug for this.

Where to? I can't seem to find it for buildd.debian.org. (We don't currently
use the buildd package from the archive.)

Kind regards
Philipp Kern
 
Old 07-12-2012, 03:11 PM
Raphael Hertzog
 
Default BinNMU changelog handling for Multi-Arch: same packages

On Thu, 12 Jul 2012, Philipp Kern wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 08:59:38AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > > > 3/ we modify sbuild to add the required "binary-only=yes" in the binNMU
> > > > changelog entries. Here's a sample header line:
> > > > ftplib (3.1-1-9+b1) unstable; urgency=low, binary-only=yes
> > > This could be done regardless if the buildd people agree to it, and that
> > > was the idea when I added this.
> > Filed a bug for this.
>
> Where to? I can't seem to find it for buildd.debian.org. (We don't currently
> use the buildd package from the archive.)

#681292 against sbuild. Feel free to clone it if necessary.

Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer

Get the Debian Administrator's Handbook:
→ http://debian-handbook.info/get/


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-dpkg-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20120712151116.GA28891@rivendell.home.ouaza.com">h ttp://lists.debian.org/20120712151116.GA28891@rivendell.home.ouaza.com
 
Old 07-12-2012, 03:25 PM
Philipp Kern
 
Default BinNMU changelog handling for Multi-Arch: same packages

On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 05:11:16PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Jul 2012, Philipp Kern wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 08:59:38AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > > > > 3/ we modify sbuild to add the required "binary-only=yes" in the binNMU
> > > > > changelog entries. Here's a sample header line:
> > > > > ftplib (3.1-1-9+b1) unstable; urgency=low, binary-only=yes
> > > > This could be done regardless if the buildd people agree to it, and that
> > > > was the idea when I added this.
> > > Filed a bug for this.
> > Where to? I can't seem to find it for buildd.debian.org. (We don't currently
> > use the buildd package from the archive.)
> #681292 against sbuild. Feel free to clone it if necessary.

I just verified a build in stable and get a bunch of these:

dpkg-source --after-build hello-2.6
parsechangelog/debian: warning: hello-2.6/debian/changelog(l1): unknown key-value Binary-only
LINE: hello (2.6-1+b1) unstable; urgency=low, binary-only=yes
parsechangelog/debian: warning: unknown information field 'Binary-Only' in input data in parsed version of changelog
dpkg-buildpackage: binary and diff upload (original source NOT included)

If we add that, dpkg in all supported suites should at least do the right
thing and ignore it.

Kind regards
Philipp Kern
 
Old 07-13-2012, 07:07 AM
Raphael Hertzog
 
Default BinNMU changelog handling for Multi-Arch: same packages

On Thu, 12 Jul 2012, Philipp Kern wrote:
> > #681292 against sbuild. Feel free to clone it if necessary.
>
> I just verified a build in stable and get a bunch of these:
>
> dpkg-source --after-build hello-2.6
> parsechangelog/debian: warning: hello-2.6/debian/changelog(l1): unknown key-value Binary-only
> LINE: hello (2.6-1+b1) unstable; urgency=low, binary-only=yes
> parsechangelog/debian: warning: unknown information field 'Binary-Only' in input data in parsed version of changelog
> dpkg-buildpackage: binary and diff upload (original source NOT included)
>
> If we add that, dpkg in all supported suites should at least do the right
> thing and ignore it.

I'm happy to prepare a stable update to fix this. Would you accept it?

Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer

Get the Debian Administrator's Handbook:
→ http://debian-handbook.info/get/


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-dpkg-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20120713070700.GB28891@rivendell.home.ouaza.com">h ttp://lists.debian.org/20120713070700.GB28891@rivendell.home.ouaza.com
 
Old 07-17-2012, 12:25 PM
Philipp Kern
 
Default BinNMU changelog handling for Multi-Arch: same packages

On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 09:07:00AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Jul 2012, Philipp Kern wrote:
> > > #681292 against sbuild. Feel free to clone it if necessary.
> > I just verified a build in stable and get a bunch of these:
> >
> > dpkg-source --after-build hello-2.6
> > parsechangelog/debian: warning: hello-2.6/debian/changelog(l1): unknown key-value Binary-only
> > LINE: hello (2.6-1+b1) unstable; urgency=low, binary-only=yes
> > parsechangelog/debian: warning: unknown information field 'Binary-Only' in input data in parsed version of changelog
> > dpkg-buildpackage: binary and diff upload (original source NOT included)
> >
> > If we add that, dpkg in all supported suites should at least do the right
> > thing and ignore it.
> I'm happy to prepare a stable update to fix this. Would you accept it?

I presume there are no other RC bugfixes for dpkg/stable pending at the moment?
Could you prepare the diff and post it here?

(I'd currently tend to accept it, however I'm not yet sure of all the
consequences of this change.)

Kind regards
Philipp Kern
 
Old 07-17-2012, 12:53 PM
Guillem Jover
 
Default BinNMU changelog handling for Multi-Arch: same packages

On Tue, 2012-07-17 at 14:25:18 +0200, Philipp Kern wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 09:07:00AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > On Thu, 12 Jul 2012, Philipp Kern wrote:
> > > > #681292 against sbuild. Feel free to clone it if necessary.
> > > I just verified a build in stable and get a bunch of these:
> > >
> > > dpkg-source --after-build hello-2.6
> > > parsechangelog/debian: warning: hello-2.6/debian/changelog(l1): unknown key-value Binary-only
> > > LINE: hello (2.6-1+b1) unstable; urgency=low, binary-only=yes
> > > parsechangelog/debian: warning: unknown information field 'Binary-Only' in input data in parsed version of changelog
> > > dpkg-buildpackage: binary and diff upload (original source NOT included)
> > >
> > > If we add that, dpkg in all supported suites should at least do the right
> > > thing and ignore it.
> > I'm happy to prepare a stable update to fix this. Would you accept it?
>
> I presume there are no other RC bugfixes for dpkg/stable pending at the
> moment? Could you prepare the diff and post it here?

No there are not, and I could prepare it yes, but I'm not sure there's
any point anyway as this alone (in wheezy) will not solve the
binNMU+multiarch case anyway, and as it's been said I think it's too
late for the other possible fixes.

> (I'd currently tend to accept it, however I'm not yet sure of all the
> consequences of this change.)

This change in itself should not have any consequence as it should not
affect the normal build if the value is not being used, or maybe you
are referring to *when* the value is being used?

regards,
guillem


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-dpkg-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20120717125319.GA15409@gaara.hadrons.org">http://lists.debian.org/20120717125319.GA15409@gaara.hadrons.org
 
Old 07-17-2012, 12:59 PM
Guillem Jover
 
Default BinNMU changelog handling for Multi-Arch: same packages

On Tue, 2012-07-17 at 14:25:18 +0200, Philipp Kern wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 09:07:00AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > On Thu, 12 Jul 2012, Philipp Kern wrote:
> > > I just verified a build in stable and get a bunch of these:
> > >
> > > dpkg-source --after-build hello-2.6
> > > parsechangelog/debian: warning: hello-2.6/debian/changelog(l1): unknown key-value Binary-only
> > > LINE: hello (2.6-1+b1) unstable; urgency=low, binary-only=yes
> > > parsechangelog/debian: warning: unknown information field 'Binary-Only' in input data in parsed version of changelog
> > > dpkg-buildpackage: binary and diff upload (original source NOT included)
> > >
> > > If we add that, dpkg in all supported suites should at least do the right
> > > thing and ignore it.

Oh and forgot to comment on this, those key-values are warned upon
because they are unknown but they are ignored and harmless on older
dpkg scripts.

> I presume there are no other RC bugfixes for dpkg/stable pending at the
> moment?

Sorry actually there is at least one, #679641 fixed in unstable now.

thanks,
guillem


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-dpkg-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20120717125934.GB15409@gaara.hadrons.org">http://lists.debian.org/20120717125934.GB15409@gaara.hadrons.org
 
Old 07-17-2012, 11:51 PM
Philipp Kern
 
Default BinNMU changelog handling for Multi-Arch: same packages

On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 02:53:19PM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote:
> > (I'd currently tend to accept it, however I'm not yet sure of all the
> > consequences of this change.)
> This change in itself should not have any consequence as it should not
> affect the normal build if the value is not being used, or maybe you
> are referring to *when* the value is being used?

I don't want to special-case a single suite in buildd/sbuild to not put
binary-only=something in there. And yes, those are only warnings, I know, but
it would be annoying to have the build logs polluted with them.

(And it's one reason why we always expect stable to support the features we use
in the archive.)

Kind regards
Philipp Kern
 
Old 07-30-2012, 07:37 AM
Raphael Hertzog
 
Default BinNMU changelog handling for Multi-Arch: same packages

Hi,

On Tue, 17 Jul 2012, Philipp Kern wrote:
> > I'm happy to prepare a stable update to fix this. Would you accept it?
>
> I presume there are no other RC bugfixes for dpkg/stable pending at the
> moment?

Guillem mentionned an SELinux fix that would be worth including too.

The commit that fixes it is here:
http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=dpkg/dpkg.git;a=commitdiff;h=7db83375c952383540631244ac e9cfefdfc908a7

This patch applies without changes on squeeze too.

> Could you prepare the diff and post it here?

The suggested diff is attached. It's a 2 line fix.

Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer

Get the Debian Administrator's Handbook:
→ http://debian-handbook.info/get/
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 01:42 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org