Bug#925524: init-system-helpers: Please provide a stretch backport for debhelper 12~
https://ftp-master.debian.org/backports-new.html > Am 31.03.2019 um 16:31 schrieb wf...@niif.hu: > > Michael Biebl writes: > >> Personally I prefer to revert the compat bumps when doing backports for >> stretch (like in [1]) as I like to to keep the impact on the stable >> system as minimal as possible. Pulling in a newer i-s-h is a rather >> significant change. > > I see. Dropping back to compat 10 is certainly an option, now that I > know that only compat 11 is affected. Thing is, this package never > used compat 10, so this requires careful review. > >> Thankfully not as significant as we had between jessie → stretch. So a >> backport of i-s-h might indeed be feasible on a cursory glance. > > Given that it would potentially help several maintainers, could you > please give this some more serious consideration? Strictly on the > theoretical level, of course. :) > -- > Thanks, > Feri > > ___ > Pkg-systemd-maintainers mailing list > pkg-systemd-maintain...@alioth-lists.debian.net > https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-systemd-maintainers
Bug#925524: init-system-helpers: Please provide a stretch backport for debhelper 12~
Michael Biebl writes: > Personally I prefer to revert the compat bumps when doing backports for > stretch (like in [1]) as I like to to keep the impact on the stable > system as minimal as possible. Pulling in a newer i-s-h is a rather > significant change. I see. Dropping back to compat 10 is certainly an option, now that I know that only compat 11 is affected. Thing is, this package never used compat 10, so this requires careful review. > Thankfully not as significant as we had between jessie → stretch. So a > backport of i-s-h might indeed be feasible on a cursory glance. Given that it would potentially help several maintainers, could you please give this some more serious consideration? Strictly on the theoretical level, of course. :) -- Thanks, Feri
Bug#925524: init-system-helpers: Please provide a stretch backport for debhelper 12~
wf...@niif.hu: > Niels Thykier writes: > >> I don't think I have much to add to it really beyond what is covered in >> https://nthykier.wordpress.com/2019/01/04/debhelper-compat-12-is-now-released/ > > Thanks for the good writeup, I missed it. > :) >> Sure it would be great to have one less caveat for upgrating to compat >> 12. But mostly release compat 12 before buster was to ensure people >> could assume compat 12 was present in buster (and less about stretch). > > I see. I was forced to compat 12 by #887904 for shibboleth-sp back in > August, and now we try to backport it to stretch. Working around > #887904 on compat 11 does not seem a simple exercise for me, that's why > I decided to pursue an init-system-helpers backport. Please correct me > if I overlook something. > Right. I aimed for making compat 12 in buster painless. Possibly compat 11 should be deprecated aggressively because it is "broken" for services (asking people to choose compat 10 or 12 instead as appropriate). >> Related note (with my RT hat on): Please defer debhelper compat bumps >> for anything targeting buster as it is not considered a "minimal change". > > I didn't even think of such things. :) However, now that you reminded > me, I've got a tricky minimal change for your RT hat, let me put that > forward as well... > :) Thanks, ~Niels
Bug#925524: init-system-helpers: Please provide a stretch backport for debhelper 12~
Etienne Dysli Metref: > On 27/03/2019 21.12, Niels Thykier wrote: >> I don't think I have much to add to it really beyond what is >> covered in https://nthykier.wordpress.com/2019/01/04/ >> debhelper-compat-12-is-now-released/ > > > Hi Niels, > > Thank you for your explanation. One point, however, isn't completely > clear to me: does that > >> Caveat for stretch-backports support: Due to the above, we need a >> versioned Pre-Depends on init-system-helpers. That version is >> unfortunately not available in stretch nor stretch-backports and >> therefore packages relying on this cannot be safely backported to >> stretch (but they will be backportable to buster). > > mean init-system-helpers 1.56 should not be backported to stretch? > > Cheers, > Etienne > I made no assertions abot whether init-system-helpers should or should be backported to stretch. If someone does it, great - it is easier for people that want to use backports. If no-one does backports init-system-helpers, then we remain at the status quo (e.g. mentioned in my blog post). Thanks, ~Niels
Bug#925524: init-system-helpers: Please provide a stretch backport for debhelper 12~
Am 28.03.19 um 11:08 schrieb wf...@niif.hu: > Felipe Sateler writes: > >> I'm not opposed to a backport, and I don't think there are many >> problems with attempting it. However, I do not have time to prepare >> and test such a backport. Help welcome. > > I can do the busy-work of backporting, but I lack the perspective to > tell whether it's feasible now or in the long run. Looking at the > changelog it feels safe to install 1.56 on a stretch system, and this > close to the release I wouldn't expect anything to come up before > stretch-backports closes, though... > Personally I prefer to revert the compat bumps when doing backports for stretch (like in [1]) as I like to to keep the impact on the stable system as minimal as possible. Pulling in a newer i-s-h is a rather significant change. Thankfully not as significant as we had between jessie → stretch. So a backport of i-s-h might indeed be feasible on a cursory glance. Regards, Michael [1] https://salsa.debian.org/debian/rsyslog/commit/6bd5a7915e826650750e5864e035edb1f4d2e31a -- Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the universe are pointed away from Earth? signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#925524: init-system-helpers: Please provide a stretch backport for debhelper 12~
Felipe Sateler writes: > I'm not opposed to a backport, and I don't think there are many > problems with attempting it. However, I do not have time to prepare > and test such a backport. Help welcome. I can do the busy-work of backporting, but I lack the perspective to tell whether it's feasible now or in the long run. Looking at the changelog it feels safe to install 1.56 on a stretch system, and this close to the release I wouldn't expect anything to come up before stretch-backports closes, though... -- Regards, Feri
Bug#925524: init-system-helpers: Please provide a stretch backport for debhelper 12~
Niels Thykier writes: > I don't think I have much to add to it really beyond what is covered in > https://nthykier.wordpress.com/2019/01/04/debhelper-compat-12-is-now-released/ Thanks for the good writeup, I missed it. > Sure it would be great to have one less caveat for upgrating to compat > 12. But mostly release compat 12 before buster was to ensure people > could assume compat 12 was present in buster (and less about stretch). I see. I was forced to compat 12 by #887904 for shibboleth-sp back in August, and now we try to backport it to stretch. Working around #887904 on compat 11 does not seem a simple exercise for me, that's why I decided to pursue an init-system-helpers backport. Please correct me if I overlook something. > Related note (with my RT hat on): Please defer debhelper compat bumps > for anything targeting buster as it is not considered a "minimal change". I didn't even think of such things. :) However, now that you reminded me, I've got a tricky minimal change for your RT hat, let me put that forward as well... -- Thanks, Feri
Bug#925524: init-system-helpers: Please provide a stretch backport for debhelper 12~
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 27/03/2019 21.12, Niels Thykier wrote: > I don't think I have much to add to it really beyond what is > covered in https://nthykier.wordpress.com/2019/01/04/ > debhelper-compat-12-is-now-released/ Hi Niels, Thank you for your explanation. One point, however, isn't completely clear to me: does that > Caveat for stretch-backports support: Due to the above, we need a > versioned Pre-Depends on init-system-helpers. That version is > unfortunately not available in stretch nor stretch-backports and > therefore packages relying on this cannot be safely backported to > stretch (but they will be backportable to buster). mean init-system-helpers 1.56 should not be backported to stretch? Cheers, Etienne -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEELcQv7Fsn8jFmeD9mw2QssxGaOsAFAlycdN0ACgkQw2QssxGa OsDCqhAAt4A3xDbK57QvvlPS+nBS6RqZsBBTHMyhzbdIxQWtNJodPy+cZsaxhxXM 2K6aqeXUL9i2i6beYvxQFK8HCnZhzIf/SxwEFFvt61WwK5OqwoH5G1RKRlDR+0tS dTFkEHfVsb1iQFKt6skOQX8QpX7vdIaf/ZZXhaIc4YpWO20npgfGuKpoA1WHFdZu Cxt3nBMElt7oqwCIZDxYiBk3WXHvQlKeXDWJWvJPcYjXJq+/qiLkKpvyDURun5y2 P5qIsY9Jl+j6DJGd+ILItPnJKMUcntK7xNVSpZnCvOH+Nn49SoaWnenYiixXHdp/ /K5Wnb+4BDRJHpinsMgVYvMQHQLlMAlZ6Mu0cXUaaV+fw5Fcin10RwOoosCNkFO2 SSz3w8uEcLM7/jqxyCu5r+QInKNEotHLbJbTIz9yOJvmorQnU90Hv+uPF1Nq++vt 3cAbXAonnD03G7+78krhEqPW85u7bDXhB1W7HxH75D2evNWVrdqCy+xVWVeOz0Lx gGE3/xxWBmDVWUXq1o2Z9z025/CRIa5/TakKU3XXmh0uJ/z7iQxKKVC+zI+i5pWr hbn6vj4rKNlkzJnv7zMOm8UhGJC5SGL8zhp2TFnQm14pGw7felhlvxUGMTieTLn9 d4+Z4fqB7Mc1UUop9XIOOk+ym3lRI8E/l0kbB8V7kQRNwU2WtYo= =SKEk -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Bug#925524: init-system-helpers: Please provide a stretch backport for debhelper 12~
wf...@niif.hu: > On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 11:29:29 +0100 =?utf-8?q?Ferenc_W=C3=A1gner?= > wrote: > >> Debhelper compat level 12 is stable and available in stretch-backports, >> but uses the --skip-systemd-native option of invoke-rc.d, thus adds >> init-system-helpers (>= 1.54~) to misc:Pre-Depends. This is necessary >> to fix https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=887904. >> However, the resulting pre-dependency can't be satisfied in stretch, >> making the resulting binaries of compat 12 packages uninstallable in >> stretch. Could you please provide a stretch backport of a suitable >> init-system-helpers version to accompany debhelper 12~, or do you >> recommend some other solution to this problem? (I suppose installing a >> newer version of init-system-helpers manually to a stretch system >> wouldn't break it, but it's rather inconvenient even if you confirm it.) > > Hi Niels, > > I'm not sure you noticed this report. In any case, I'd be much > interested to hear your opinion concerning this issue. > I don't think I have much to add to it really beyond what is covered in https://nthykier.wordpress.com/2019/01/04/debhelper-compat-12-is-now-released/ Sure it would be great to have one less caveat for upgrating to compat 12. But mostly release compat 12 before buster was to ensure people could assume compat 12 was present in buster (and less about stretch). Related note (with my RT hat on): Please defer debhelper compat bumps for anything targeting buster as it is not considered a "minimal change". Thanks, ~Niels
Bug#925524: init-system-helpers: Please provide a stretch backport for debhelper 12~
On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 7:33 AM wrote: > On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 11:29:29 +0100 =?utf-8?q?Ferenc_W=C3=A1gner?= < > wf...@debian.org> wrote: > > > Debhelper compat level 12 is stable and available in stretch-backports, > > but uses the --skip-systemd-native option of invoke-rc.d, thus adds > > init-system-helpers (>= 1.54~) to misc:Pre-Depends. This is necessary > > to fix https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=887904. > > However, the resulting pre-dependency can't be satisfied in stretch, > > making the resulting binaries of compat 12 packages uninstallable in > > stretch. Could you please provide a stretch backport of a suitable > > init-system-helpers version to accompany debhelper 12~, or do you > > recommend some other solution to this problem? (I suppose installing a > > newer version of init-system-helpers manually to a stretch system > > wouldn't break it, but it's rather inconvenient even if you confirm it.) > > Hi Niels, > > I'm not sure you noticed this report. In any case, I'd be much > interested to hear your opinion concerning this issue. > I'm not opposed to a backport, and I don't think there are many problems with attempting it. However, I do not have time to prepare and test such a backport. Help welcome. -- Saludos, Felipe Sateler
Bug#925524: init-system-helpers: Please provide a stretch backport for debhelper 12~
On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 11:29:29 +0100 =?utf-8?q?Ferenc_W=C3=A1gner?= wrote: > Debhelper compat level 12 is stable and available in stretch-backports, > but uses the --skip-systemd-native option of invoke-rc.d, thus adds > init-system-helpers (>= 1.54~) to misc:Pre-Depends. This is necessary > to fix https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=887904. > However, the resulting pre-dependency can't be satisfied in stretch, > making the resulting binaries of compat 12 packages uninstallable in > stretch. Could you please provide a stretch backport of a suitable > init-system-helpers version to accompany debhelper 12~, or do you > recommend some other solution to this problem? (I suppose installing a > newer version of init-system-helpers manually to a stretch system > wouldn't break it, but it's rather inconvenient even if you confirm it.) Hi Niels, I'm not sure you noticed this report. In any case, I'd be much interested to hear your opinion concerning this issue. -- Thanks, Feri
Bug#925524: init-system-helpers: Please provide a stretch backport for debhelper 12~
Package: init-system-helpers Version: 1.48 Severity: wishlist Dear Maintainers, Debhelper compat level 12 is stable and available in stretch-backports, but uses the --skip-systemd-native option of invoke-rc.d, thus adds init-system-helpers (>= 1.54~) to misc:Pre-Depends. This is necessary to fix https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=887904. However, the resulting pre-dependency can't be satisfied in stretch, making the resulting binaries of compat 12 packages uninstallable in stretch. Could you please provide a stretch backport of a suitable init-system-helpers version to accompany debhelper 12~, or do you recommend some other solution to this problem? (I suppose installing a newer version of init-system-helpers manually to a stretch system wouldn't break it, but it's rather inconvenient even if you confirm it.) -- Thanks, Feri.
