Re: Bug#1060134: kmod-udeb vs busybox-udeb: agree on who ships depmod

2024-04-09 Thread Cyril Brulebois 
Hi,

Marco d'Itri  (2024-04-09):
> Yes. Nowadays kmod has many more features related to compressed modules 
> and verification of signatures.
> Can we agree that kmod should provide these programs for d-i?
> Or can the d-i maintainers just tell us what they want?

I meant to come back to this after experimenting, then things happened…

I picked kmod at the time because it worked, and because busybox didn't
work, which I summed up in:
  
https://salsa.debian.org/installer-team/debian-installer/-/commit/450daf0bd24ee94d4f466ab65908c079ef795145

(plus follow-up commit, woopsie
  
https://salsa.debian.org/installer-team/debian-installer/-/commit/69777be465c5d0210d16159a456ab88535513a07
)

I'm fine with sticking to kmod regarding module support in d-i. I'm not
sure we should keep support in two different modules, so dropping it
from busybox would work for me. Others might have different views on
this, though.


Cheers,
-- 
Cyril Brulebois (k...@debian.org)
D-I release manager -- Release team member -- Freelance Consultant


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Bug#1060134: kmod-udeb vs busybox-udeb: agree on who ships depmod

2024-04-09 Thread Marco d'Itri 
On Jan 06, Michael Tokarev  wrote:

> Yes, some utils in busybox aren't as good as regular implementations. For
Yes. Nowadays kmod has many more features related to compressed modules 
and verification of signatures.
Can we agree that kmod should provide these programs for d-i?
Or can the d-i maintainers just tell us what they want?

-- 
ciao,
Marco


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Processed: found 1060134 in 28-1, found 1060134 in 1:1.30.1-6, found 1068698 in 2:2.0-2 ..., tagging 1056608 ...

2024-04-09 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System 
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:

> found 1060134 28-1
Bug #1060134 [kmod-udeb,busybox-udeb] kmod-udeb vs busybox-udeb: agree on who 
ships depmod
There is no source info for the package 'busybox-udeb' at version '28-1' with 
architecture ''
Marked as found in versions kmod/28-1.
> found 1060134 1:1.30.1-6
Bug #1060134 [kmod-udeb,busybox-udeb] kmod-udeb vs busybox-udeb: agree on who 
ships depmod
There is no source info for the package 'kmod-udeb' at version '1:1.30.1-6' 
with architecture ''
Marked as found in versions busybox/1:1.30.1-6.
> found 1068698 2:2.0-2
Bug #1068698 [src:hdf-eos5] hdf-eos5 2:2.0-2 silently reverts the 64-bit time_t 
transition
Marked as found in versions hdf-eos5/2:2.0-2.
> notfound 1068696 0.2.15-5
Bug #1068696 [haskell-hourglass] haskell-hourglass FTBFS on armel and armhf
There is no source info for the package 'haskell-hourglass' at version 
'0.2.15-5' with architecture ''
Unable to make a source version for version '0.2.15-5'
No longer marked as found in versions 0.2.15-5.
> found 1068696 0.2.12-5
Bug #1068696 [haskell-hourglass] haskell-hourglass FTBFS on armel and armhf
There is no source info for the package 'haskell-hourglass' at version 
'0.2.12-5' with architecture ''
Unable to make a source version for version '0.2.12-5'
Marked as found in versions 0.2.12-5.
> retitle 1060939 python-workalendar: FTBFS: CalendarError: Need configure 2024 
> for China.
Bug #1060939 [src:python-workalendar] python-workalendar: FTBFS: dh_auto_test: 
error: pybuild --test --test-pytest -i python{version} -p "3.12 3.11" returned 
exit code 13
Changed Bug title to 'python-workalendar: FTBFS: CalendarError: Need configure 
2024 for China.' from 'python-workalendar: FTBFS: dh_auto_test: error: pybuild 
--test --test-pytest -i python{version} -p "3.12 3.11" returned exit code 13'.
> tags 1056608 - bookworm
Bug #1056608 [timeshift] timeshift: Timeshift cant restore RSYNC snapshots if 
your system installed on BTRFS with wrong subvolume
Removed tag(s) bookworm.
> fixed 1056608 23.07.1-1
Bug #1056608 [timeshift] timeshift: Timeshift cant restore RSYNC snapshots if 
your system installed on BTRFS with wrong subvolume
Marked as fixed in versions timeshift/23.07.1-1.
> found 1052230 4.1.9-1
Bug #1052230 {Done: Stéphane Glondu } [src:ocamlnet] 
"Missing build-dependency on pkg-config"
Marked as found in versions ocamlnet/4.1.9-1.
> tags 1052230 + sid trixie
Bug #1052230 {Done: Stéphane Glondu } [src:ocamlnet] 
"Missing build-dependency on pkg-config"
Added tag(s) sid and trixie.
> tags 1050175 + sid trixie
Bug #1050175 {Done: Mo Zhou } [python3-torch] Missing symbol 
when importing torch
Added tag(s) sid and trixie.
> found 1050516 1.4.3-1
Bug #1050516 {Done: Bastian Germann } [src:checkit-tiff] 
checkit-tiff: FTBFS on big-endian platforms
The source 'checkit-tiff' and version '1.4.3-1' do not appear to match any 
binary packages
Marked as found in versions checkit-tiff/1.4.3-1.
> tags 1042960 + sid trixie
Bug #1042960 {Done: Dmitry Baryshkov } [gcc-doc-base] 
FTBFS: error: parsing file 'debian/gcc-doc/DEBIAN/control' near line 3 package 
'gcc-doc'
Added tag(s) trixie and sid.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.

Please contact me if you need assistance.
-- 
1042960: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1042960
1050175: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1050175
1050516: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1050516
1052230: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1052230
1056608: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1056608
1060134: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1060134
1060939: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1060939
1068696: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1068696
1068698: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1068698
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

Processed: Re: Bug#1068637: apt does not always install Recommends

2024-04-09 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System 
Processing control commands:

> reassign 1068637 debian-installer
Bug #1068637 [debian-installer] apt does not always install Recommends
Bug #931283 [debian-installer] base-installer doesn't install Recommends for 
most packages
Bug #1068560 [debian-installer] "Recommends: thin-provisioning-tools" is 
insufficient or unnecessary
Ignoring request to reassign bug #1068637 to the same package
Ignoring request to reassign bug #931283 to the same package
Ignoring request to reassign bug #1068560 to the same package
> reassign 1068560 debian-installer
Bug #1068560 [debian-installer] "Recommends: thin-provisioning-tools" is 
insufficient or unnecessary
Bug #931283 [debian-installer] base-installer doesn't install Recommends for 
most packages
Bug #1068637 [debian-installer] apt does not always install Recommends
Ignoring request to reassign bug #1068560 to the same package
Ignoring request to reassign bug #931283 to the same package
Ignoring request to reassign bug #1068637 to the same package
> forcemerge 931283 1068637 1068560
Bug #931283 [debian-installer] base-installer doesn't install Recommends for 
most packages
Bug #1068560 [debian-installer] "Recommends: thin-provisioning-tools" is 
insufficient or unnecessary
Bug #1068637 [debian-installer] apt does not always install Recommends
Bug #1068560 [debian-installer] "Recommends: thin-provisioning-tools" is 
insufficient or unnecessary
Bug #1068637 [debian-installer] apt does not always install Recommends
Merged 931283 1068560 1068637

-- 
1068560: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1068560
1068637: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1068637
931283: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=931283
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

Re: Bug#1068637: apt does not always install Recommends

2024-04-09 Thread David Kalnischkies 
Control: reassign 1068637 debian-installer
Control: reassign 1068560 debian-installer
Control: forcemerge 931283 1068637 1068560

Summary of bug(s) so far: lvm2 installed by d-i without its Recommends
Question: Can we solve this once and for all or do we need/want a
 workaround and/or downgrade for lvm2 only to make user happy
[only pun intended]

Merging both into #931283 that seems to be about the same thing.

On Tue, Apr 09, 2024 at 02:17:18AM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> Then, I don't know the internals. But according to Bastian Blank[*]:
> "It is installed like everything else." (but see the details below).
> 
> [*] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1068560#22

He likely meant that you have installed it, "like everything else"
because that is what users usually do and you weren't particular clear
that you haven't – and what you used that did for you… lvm2 isn't
"a core package", so there are certainly ways of installing Debian
(even with d-i, which isn't the only way either) without lvm2.

d-i seems to install packages without recommends:
https://salsa.debian.org/installer-team/base-installer/-/blob/master/library.sh?ref_type=heads#L152
That is later dropped for "everything else", but I suppose lvm2 is
installed before that – but I don't know much about d-i or lvm2.


Anyway, it probably isn't a good idea to have d-i install all recommends
while it sets up the machine – better things to do and all that –, but
perhaps it can as one of the last actions (final_apt_preferences ?) run
something like:
| apt-get install --fix-policy
(after the config is removed, or add --install-recommends).

Likely involves demoting some 'Recommends' in the base set to 'Suggests'
through, but they behave like that already if installed by d-i, so that
is probably for the best for consistency alone.

In any case, I will leave d-i folks have fun with this now,
but feel free to ask apt-team if there is something we can help with.


Best regards

David Kalnischkies


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Processed: Re: Bug#1068637: apt does not always install Recommends

2024-04-09 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System 
Processing control commands:

> reassign 1068637 debian-installer
Bug #1068637 [apt] apt does not always install Recommends
Bug reassigned from package 'apt' to 'debian-installer'.
No longer marked as found in versions apt/2.7.14.
Ignoring request to alter fixed versions of bug #1068637 to the same values 
previously set
> reassign 1068560 debian-installer
Bug #1068560 {Done: Bastian Blank } [lvm2] "Recommends: 
thin-provisioning-tools" is insufficient or unnecessary
Bug reassigned from package 'lvm2' to 'debian-installer'.
No longer marked as found in versions lvm2/2.03.22-1.
Ignoring request to alter fixed versions of bug #1068560 to the same values 
previously set
> forcemerge 931283 1068637 1068560
Bug #931283 [debian-installer] base-installer doesn't install Recommends for 
most packages
Bug #1068560 {Done: Bastian Blank } [debian-installer] 
"Recommends: thin-provisioning-tools" is insufficient or unnecessary
Severity set to 'important' from 'normal'
Bug reopened
Ignoring request to alter fixed versions of bug #1068560 to the same values 
previously set
Marked as found in versions debian-installer/20190410.
Bug #1068637 [debian-installer] apt does not always install Recommends
Severity set to 'important' from 'wishlist'
Marked as found in versions debian-installer/20190410.
Merged 931283 1068560 1068637

-- 
1068560: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1068560
1068637: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1068637
931283: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=931283
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems