Bug#757985: kfreebsd-* release status?

2014-08-19 Thread Steven Chamberlain
On 19/08/14 00:40, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> [ I'm adding -release@ to the loop. I tried to refrain from mentioning
> my concerns in the Jessie Beta 1 announce, that's why I used a quite
> neutral wording, but let's be honest: kfreebsd-* is looking bad right
> now. ]

I was drafting a quite long reply to this, but after 15 minutes, I
realised whatever precious time we have, needs to be spent fixing the
bugs, not discussing this.  So I'll reply to each of the bugs individually.

In short, yes I think kfreebsd does have high workload right now;  we
could use more help as the freeze approaches, but I'm not worried.

Regards,
-- 
Steven Chamberlain
ste...@pyro.eu.org



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Bug#757985: kfreebsd-* release status? (was: #757985: kfreebsd: d-i hangs)

2014-08-18 Thread Cyril Brulebois
[ I'm adding -release@ to the loop. I tried to refrain from mentioning
my concerns in the Jessie Beta 1 announce, that's why I used a quite
neutral wording, but let's be honest: kfreebsd-* is looking bad right
now. ]

Cyril Brulebois  (2014-08-14):
> Steven Chamberlain  (2014-08-13):
> > Some new installer components have appeared since wheezy, such as
> > partman-iscsi, which is arch: all.  It is of no use without
> > open-iscsi-udeb, which is linux-any.
> > 
> > Is it a bug that it is added into kfreebsd images with unsatisfied
> > dependencies?  And/or, must we work around it by making
> > partman-iscsi arch: linux-any?
> > 
> > I know it is not very big, but it is shown in the partman menu,
> > despite it not going to work. I don't think we'll have userland
> > iSCSI initiator support for jessie.
> 
> (Non-)installability seems quite orthogonal to the fact that we're
> hitting ENOSPC right after locale-related settings, doesn't it? If a
> single extra udeb (or udeb size increase, which happens from time to
> time) is going to break kfreebsd-*, it seems to me that their status
> is far too brittle.

To expand a bit on my earlier reply: that wouldn't be the first
partman-* package being uninstallable. See the edos/dose reports
(table or graphs):
  http://d-i.debian.org/edos/#unstable
  http://d-i.debian.org/edos/graph-unstable-kfreebsd-amd64.png
  http://d-i.debian.org/edos/graph-unstable-kfreebsd-i386.png

> I'm also quite astonished about being the one reporting that. Did I
> miss developer/porter testing and/or user reports?
> 
> This kind of breakage is so bad that I would have expected reports
> way earlier, or at least before my own noticing that these images
> are unusable…

Is anyone currently working on figuring out what exactly the problem
is, and how to fix it?

FWIW the current state of d-i on kfreebsd-*, along with unfixed (not
even replied to) serious bug reports in kfreebsd headers (#750836,
#756553), and upgradability issues (kernel removal, #756464) kind of
get me worried about kfreebsd-* releasability for jessie.

Mraw,
KiBi.


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature