On Wed, 2022-02-09 at 12:26 -0600, Judah Richardson wrote: > Fair. The package in Raspberry Pi OS lists you and someone else (I > forgot the name, my apologies) as the maintainers. So either the > Raspberry Pi OS' repo records are wrong, or the Foundation is simply > using the upstream package as is.
I'm not a maintainer of the unattended-upgrades package in Debian, so that is surprising. I am just someone who uses unattended-upgrades and didn't want your bug report to cause its removal from Debian bookworm, since release-critical (Severity: serious and higher) bugs do that. I am assuming the RPi OS is using the unmodified Debian package. Any issues could still be caused by the RPi OS apt repositories though, since they could have other packages different to Debian and apt/unattended-upgrades are very sensitive to dependency problems or mismatches. Generally the recommendation when using a Debian based distribution is to try and reproduce issues on plain Debian before reporting a bug in Debian. The same applies to reporting directly to the upstream projects that get packaged in Debian. Based on the output of the commands you pasted: The RPi OS is not using the Debian package of chromium, they have their own package that is a fair bit older than the Debian package. You don't have any pending package updates and therefore no possibility of unattended-upgrade failures. So I think we can close the bug report. -- bye, pabs https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
