Re: Bug#800014: multipath-udeb: not installable: depends on libsystemd0

[Cyril Brulebois]

[ Adding debian-boot@lists.debian.org back. ]

Ritesh Raj Sarraf  (2015-09-28):
> Adding systemd maintainers
> 
> 
> Hello Cyril,
> 
> THank you for the bug report.
> 
> 
> On Fri, 2015-09-25 at 11:59 +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> > Package: multipath-udeb
> > Version: 0.5.0+git0.770e6d0d-3
> > Severity: grave
> > Justification: renders package unusable
> > 
> > 
> > [ Please keep debian-boot@lists.debian.org in the loop. ]
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > Your package in unstable gained a dependency which cannot be
> > satisfied:
> > libsystemd0 has no udeb. It's therefore no longer installable, along
> > with partman-multipath which depends on it.
> 
> This was intentionally done because upstream added systemd dependency
> some time ago. For Jessie, I had disabled systemd support, but now, it
> makes sense to have it, and align with upstream and other
> distributions.
> 
> So, I think the real question is about why libsystemd0 does not have a
> udeb ?
> 
> systemd maintainers should provide that input.

Some input from someone who doesn't know a thing about systemd or
multipath: libmultipath.so.0 has a NEEDED entry on libsystemd.so.0,
which seems to only define symbols named sd_* (which seems fair). The
only use I see in libmultipath.so.0 is sd_listen_fds.

Its manpage says:

   sd_listen_fds() shall be called by a daemon to check for file
   descriptors passed by the init system as part of the socket-based
   activation logic.

There's no systemd in d-i, so there's no socket-based activation logic,
and you can't rely on that in your multipath udeb.

Mraw,
KiBi.


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Bug#800014: multipath-udeb: not installable: depends on libsystemd0

[Ritesh Raj Sarraf]

On Mon, 2015-09-28 at 18:53 +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> [ Adding debian-boot@lists.debian.org back. ]
> 

Sorry about that.


> > This was intentionally done because upstream added systemd
> > dependency
> > some time ago. For Jessie, I had disabled systemd support, but now,
> > it
> > makes sense to have it, and align with upstream and other
> > distributions.
> > 
> > So, I think the real question is about why libsystemd0 does not
> > have a
> > udeb ?
> > 
> > systemd maintainers should provide that input.
> 
> Some input from someone who doesn't know a thing about systemd or
> multipath: libmultipath.so.0 has a NEEDED entry on libsystemd.so.0,
> which seems to only define symbols named sd_* (which seems fair). The
> only use I see in libmultipath.so.0 is sd_listen_fds.
> 
> Its manpage says:
> 
>sd_listen_fds() shall be called by a daemon to check for file
>descriptors passed by the init system as part of the socket
> -based
>activation logic.
> 
> There's no systemd in d-i, so there's no socket-based activation
> logic,
> and you can't rely on that in your multipath udeb.


Hmmm... I'll look into it later. But when you say "No systemd in d-i",
does it mean that is how it is going to remain ?

-- 
Ritesh Raj Sarraf | http://people.debian.org/~rrs
Debian - The Universal Operating System


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: Bug#800014: multipath-udeb: not installable: depends on libsystemd0

[Hendrik Boom]

On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 11:17:42PM +0530, Ritesh Raj Sarraf wrote:
> On Mon, 2015-09-28 at 18:53 +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> > [ Adding debian-boot@lists.debian.org back. ]
> > 
> 
> Sorry about that.
> 
> 
> > > This was intentionally done because upstream added systemd
> > > dependency
> > > some time ago. For Jessie, I had disabled systemd support, but now,
> > > it
> > > makes sense to have it, and align with upstream and other
> > > distributions.

For the sake of derivatives without systemd, you might see if it's 
practical to leave the systemd dependency optional.

-- hendrik

> > > 
> > > So, I think the real question is about why libsystemd0 does not
> > > have a
> > > udeb ?
> > > 
> > > systemd maintainers should provide that input.
> > 
> > Some input from someone who doesn't know a thing about systemd or
> > multipath: libmultipath.so.0 has a NEEDED entry on libsystemd.so.0,
> > which seems to only define symbols named sd_* (which seems fair). The
> > only use I see in libmultipath.so.0 is sd_listen_fds.
> > 
> > Its manpage says:
> > 
> >sd_listen_fds() shall be called by a daemon to check for file
> >descriptors passed by the init system as part of the socket
> > -based
> >activation logic.
> > 
> > There's no systemd in d-i, so there's no socket-based activation
> > logic,
> > and you can't rely on that in your multipath udeb.
> 
> 
> Hmmm... I'll look into it later. But when you say "No systemd in d-i",
> does it mean that is how it is going to remain ?
> 
> -- 
> Ritesh Raj Sarraf | http://people.debian.org/~rrs
> Debian - The Universal Operating System

Re: Bug#800014: multipath-udeb: not installable: depends on libsystemd0

[Cyril Brulebois]

Ritesh Raj Sarraf  (2015-09-28):
> Hmmm... I'll look into it later. But when you say "No systemd in d-i",
> does it mean that is how it is going to remain ?

I'm not sure why there would be a need to change that in the near
future.

Mraw,
KiBi.


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Bug#800014: multipath-udeb: not installable: depends on libsystemd0

[Cyril Brulebois]

Package: multipath-udeb
Version: 0.5.0+git0.770e6d0d-3
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable


[ Please keep debian-boot@lists.debian.org in the loop. ]

Hi,

Your package in unstable gained a dependency which cannot be satisfied:
libsystemd0 has no udeb. It's therefore no longer installable, along
with partman-multipath which depends on it.

Mraw,
KiBi.