Re: Is there a good solution for this: release-upgrade with dependency moved to universe

2024-01-12 Thread Nick Rosbrook
Hi,

> I guess something in do-release-upgrade could be run to, when encountering 
> such a situation, automatically select bin:samba-vfs-modules-extra for the 
> upgrade as well? Is it worth it? Is there a precedence for something like 
> this? And how would this be done in a more generic/general case, if at all?

We have the concept of "quirks"[1] in ubuntu-release-upgrader which
allows us to handle special cases like this. For example, a cycle or
two ago when flatpak was removed from flavor seeds, we added some code
to not auto-remove flatpak if it appeared the user was actively using
it. So yes, if nothing else we could add a quirk to make sure
samba-vfs-modules-extra is installed upgrades if samba-vfs-modules is
currently installed.

Thanks,
Nick

[1] 
https://git.launchpad.net/ubuntu-release-upgrader/tree/DistUpgrade/DistUpgradeQuirks.py

-- 
ubuntu-devel mailing list
ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel


Is there a good solution for this: release-upgrade with dependency moved to universe

2024-01-12 Thread Andreas Hasenack
I have package bin:samba-vfs-modules which ships, among other things, a
glusterfs module:

  /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/samba/vfs/glusterfs.so
  /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/samba/vfs/glusterfs_fuse.so

We intend[1] to demote glusterfs to Universe, and since
bin:samba-vfs-modules is in main, one solution is to create another
package, let's say, called bin:samba-vfs-modules-extra, with said glusterfs
module, and ship that in universe.

That's case #7 of the package transition guide[2].

Due to this move, any upgrade from the old bin:samba-vfs-modules to the new
bin:samba-vfs-modules will *lose* the glusterfs module. I cannot make one
depend on the other because bin:samba-vfs-modules-extra is in universe, and
as we all know, we can't have a package in main depend on one in universe.

Such a file move between packages will not happen in an SRU, but in the
devel release. Which means users who were relying on an installation that
used the samba vfs gluster module, and do-release-upgrade to noble, their
samba server will likely break until bin:samba-vfs-modules-extra is
installed. Of course this can and will be noted in the release notes, but
even then, there is nothing the user could do before-hand to not encounter
this problem, other than prepare, and know how to fix it after the upgrade
is finished. Not a super nice experience.

I guess something in do-release-upgrade could be run to, when encountering
such a situation, automatically select bin:samba-vfs-modules-extra for the
upgrade as well? Is it worth it? Is there a precedence for something like
this? And how would this be done in a more generic/general case, if at all?

Another option would be to move bin:samba-vfs-modules to universe, and deal
with those consequences. Then I wouldn't need this specific package split.

In the end, this is still better than just dropping the glusterfs module
from the build, which would leave users with no way out whatsoever.

I used samba as an example, but the same problem exists for qemu (which
also ships a gluster storage driver), and in that case it would probably
mean VMs not coming back up until the new (now in universe) package is
installed.



1. https://launchpad.net/bugs/2045063
2. https://wiki.debian.org/PackageTransition
-- 
ubuntu-devel mailing list
ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel


Re: Any hint how to fix python 3.11 pth files errors? (Was, First Noble Numbat test rebuild)

2024-01-12 Thread Graham Inggs
Hi Sébastien

Both of those packages have FTBFS bugs filed in Debian [1][2] since a
rebuild there in October 2023.

I'd guess it was some change made in pybuild / dh-python.  I don't
recall seeing similar failures in any of the recent Python rebuilds
happening in Ubuntu.  I did ask in # debian-python if anyone had any
ideas, but have not received any responses yet.

Regards
Graham


[1] https://bugs.debian.org/1054783
[2] https://bugs.debian.org/1054795

-- 
ubuntu-devel mailing list
ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel