The Precise Pangolin has reached end of life, so this bug will not be
fixed for that release
** Changed in: openafs (Ubuntu Precise)
Status: Confirmed => Won't Fix
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
Since I don’t have the ability to unmark this as fixed in Precise (which
it is not), as opposed to Precise Backports (which it is), I’m reopening
it in Ubuntu. Users are still running into this problem because most
users do not have backports enabled. For example, bug 1325352 was just
filed today.
If someone with the appropriate permissions can set this back to
Confirmed in Precise, that would be appreciated.
Done.
** Changed in: openafs (Ubuntu Precise)
Status: Fix Released = Confirmed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is
Thanks, Felix.
** Changed in: openafs (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed = Fix Released
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1206387
Title:
openafs-modules-dkms 1.6.1-1+ubuntu0.2: module
** Changed in: openafs (Ubuntu Precise)
Status: In Progress = Fix Released
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1206387
Title:
openafs-modules-dkms 1.6.1-1+ubuntu0.2: module FTBFS
This is fixed in precise-backports, not precise. Can you please unmark
this as fixed in precise, if nothing else so that affected users can
find this report?
** Also affects: precise-backports
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Changed in: precise-backports
Status: New = Fix
** Changed in: openafs (Ubuntu Precise)
Assignee: Rafael David Tinoco (inaddy) = (unassigned)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1206387
Title:
openafs-modules-dkms
Backport accepted on -backports (LP #1274324).
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1206387
Title:
openafs-modules-dkms 1.6.1-1+ubuntu0.2: module FTBFS on 3.8.0
To manage notifications
Sorry, the correct LP number is LP #1324288.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1206387
Title:
openafs-modules-dkms 1.6.1-1+ubuntu0.2: module FTBFS on 3.8.0
To manage notifications
I was able to install the openafs 1.6.7-1~precise1 packages from the
provided PPA and they installed and built modules via DKMS with the HWE
linux-generic-lts-saucy kernel on a 12.04 system.
Currently we can use these packages in a separate repo we add to systems
during install time and doing
Micheal,
I have fulfilled the -backports request as guidelines request on public
bug:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/precise-backports/+bug/1324288
Awaiting for ubuntu-backporters to respond.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to
, 2014 8:11 am
Subject: [Bug 1206387] Re: openafs-modules-dkms 1.6.1-1+ubuntu0.2: module FTBFS
on 3.8.0
After this discussion (and some other customers/users requests on the
same bug), knowing that the 1.6.5 backport was not eligible for a SRU
(just like Steve pointed out) I started to cherry
After this discussion (and some other customers/users requests on the
same bug), knowing that the 1.6.5 backport was not eligible for a SRU
(just like Steve pointed out) I started to cherry-pick code from openafs
1.6.5 to openafs 1.6.1, so the openafs dkms module was able to compile
on HWE
openafs_1.6.7-1ubuntu1_source.changes
** Attachment added: openafs_1.6.7-1ubuntu1_source.changes
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/openafs/+bug/1206387/+attachment/4120570/+files/openafs_1.6.7-1ubuntu1_source.changes
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of
openafs_1.6.7-1ubuntu1.dsc
** Attachment added: openafs_1.6.7-1ubuntu1.dsc
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/openafs/+bug/1206387/+attachment/4120568/+files/openafs_1.6.7-1ubuntu1.dsc
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed
IMHO backporting OpenAFS from trusty to precise (-backports) would be
the best in this case and probably meet with customers/users
requirement/expectation (just like Micheal pointed out).
With that in mind,
I have backported openafs, from trusty (1.6.7-1) to precise
(1.6.7-1ubuntu1), and made
openafs_1.6.7-1ubuntu1.debian.tar.xz
** Attachment added: openafs_1.6.7-1ubuntu1.debian.tar.xz
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/openafs/+bug/1206387/+attachment/4120569/+files/openafs_1.6.7-1ubuntu1.debian.tar.xz
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of
Thank you very much Rafael. I'll test the packages from the PPA today on
our HWE installs and provide any feedback we may have.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1206387
Title:
The version number is too high. Packages in -backports need to have a
smaller version number than the releases they were backported from;
otherwise release upgrades will not work as expected. Usually this is
accomplished with a decreasing ‘~’, as in 1.6.7-1~precise1 or
1.6.7-1~ubuntu8.04.1.
--
(Er, I meant ~ubuntu10.04.1, of course.)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1206387
Title:
openafs-modules-dkms 1.6.1-1+ubuntu0.2: module FTBFS on 3.8.0
To manage notifications about
** Attachment removed: openafs_1.6.7-1ubuntu1.dsc
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/openafs/+bug/1206387/+attachment/4120568/+files/openafs_1.6.7-1ubuntu1.dsc
** Attachment removed: openafs_1.6.7-1ubuntu1.debian.tar.xz
** Changed in: openafs (Ubuntu)
Assignee: Rafael David Tinoco (inaddy) = (unassigned)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1206387
Title:
openafs-modules-dkms 1.6.1-1+ubuntu0.2:
Of course Anders. You're absolutely right, my fault.
I've updated package version and fixed ppa repository.
I'm also attaching new package source.
Thanks!
PS: Functional tests still needed.
** Attachment added: openafs_1.6.7-1~precise1.dsc
openafs_1.6.7-1~precise1.debian.tar.xz
** Attachment added: openafs_1.6.7-1~precise1.debian.tar.xz
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/openafs/+bug/1206387/+attachment/4121051/+files/openafs_1.6.7-1%7Eprecise1.debian.tar.xz
--
You received this bug notification because you are a
openafs_1.6.7-1~precise1_source.changes
** Attachment added: openafs_1.6.7-1~precise1_source.changes
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/openafs/+bug/1206387/+attachment/4121053/+files/openafs_1.6.7-1%7Eprecise1_source.changes
--
You received this bug notification because you are a
** Changed in: openafs (Ubuntu Precise)
Status: Confirmed = In Progress
** Changed in: openafs (Ubuntu Precise)
Assignee: (unassigned) = Rafael David Tinoco (inaddy)
** Changed in: openafs (Ubuntu)
Assignee: (unassigned) = Rafael David Tinoco (inaddy)
--
You received this bug
Is it possible to get the OpenAFS 1.6.5 packages into precise-backports
while not replacing the original 1.6.1 packages? I thought the backports
repository was build for situations like this where newer versions can
be installed on older LTS releases.
--
You received this bug notification
On Tue, Dec 03, 2013 at 12:04:52AM -, Jonathan Reed wrote:
Not to get too off topic (and I tried to bring this up in UDS chats when
rolling releases/HWE became a thing), but that really only works in
homogenous environments, which are not really a thing in academia or
other large
Running a 1.6.5 module against a 1.6.1 userspace seems like a worse idea
than taking 1.6.5 as an SRU. Would you accept the backport if we
provided additional userland test cases?
I'm not interested in starting a debate about the HWE process, but from
our perspective, the HWE stack broke a
Jonathan Reed jdr...@mit.edu writes:
Running a 1.6.5 module against a 1.6.1 userspace seems like a worse idea
than taking 1.6.5 as an SRU.
It *should* be harmless, but I think it's also safe to say that it's not
something anyone's likely intentionally testing.
You could pull up only the
You could pull up only the necessary changes for Linux kernel portability,
I think there were quite a few, but that's probably still easier than the
solution that Steve recommended.
Indeed, that would be our first choice from an SRU POV. I was just offering
the upgrade only the kernel bits
Steve Langasek steve.langa...@canonical.com writes:
I don't think we would want to accept a wholesale update, even with
added userspace test cases. The previous SRU upload was based on a
package *not* intended for a stable release update; it includes many
changes that are clearly appropriate
On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 10:31:26PM -, Russ Allbery wrote:
I will say that this is the serious problem with accepting new kernels
into a stable release. If you accept a new kernel version but don't
accept new upstream releases of all the separately-packaged kernel
modules, you basically
On Dec 2, 2013, at 6:11 PM, Steve Langasek wrote:
Only if you use the new point release media, or
explicitly opt in to the new enablement stack, do you get the newer kernels.
[...]
If you have newer hardware that requires the newer enablement stack, it's
better to have it available than
I don't think we can accept this backport as an enablement SRU. The
openafs package doesn't just include a kernel module, it also includes
all the related userspace components (as you know), including libraries
and pam modules, for which you've included no test case; and there are
extensive
I have validated the package pending acceptance in proposed
(1.6.5.1-1~ubuntu0.12.04.1) builds and functions as an OpenAFS client on
all four supported kernels in Precise. That is, 3.2.x, 3.5.x, 3.8.x,
3.11.x.
This was on a system with Debathena packages that installed MIT's
OpenAFS and Kerberos
** Changed in: openafs (Ubuntu Precise)
Status: Confirmed = In Progress
** Changed in: openafs (Ubuntu Precise)
Assignee: (unassigned) = Luke Faraone (lfaraone)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
I've uploaded 1.6.5.1-1ubuntu0.12.04.1 and it is currently sitting in
the queue for precise-proposed
** Changed in: openafs (Ubuntu Precise)
Status: In Progress = Confirmed
** Changed in: openafs (Ubuntu Precise)
Assignee: Luke Faraone (lfaraone) = (unassigned)
--
You received this
** Patch added: openafs_1.6.5-1ubuntu0.12.04.1.debdiff
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/precise/+source/openafs/+bug/1206387/+attachment/3870917/+files/openafs_1.6.5-1ubuntu0.12.04.1.debdiff
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed
Updated backport for saucy’s 1.6.5-1ubuntu3, which adds one patch for
kernel 3.11 support (bug 1222376), so we won’t have to go through this
yet again for the 12.04.4 cycle. No changes to the backport diff itself,
just the debian/changelog context.
--
You received this bug notification because
** Tags added: regression-update
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1206387
Title:
openafs-modules-dkms 1.6.1-1+ubuntu0.2: module FTBFS on 3.8.0
To manage notifications about this bug
** Description changed:
- Looks like we need to patch for 3.8.0 changes again in the LTS…
+ [Impact]
+ Since the backported Raring kernel 3.8 was released into Precise and is
installed by default, OpenAFS cannot be installed on Precise. The out-of-tree
OpenAFS kernel module needs to be
I endorse the backporting of 1.6.5 as an SRU. This version of AFS has
been widely tested and deployed, and looking over the changelog there do
not appear to be material changes that would cause compatibility issues.
No packages depend on OpenAFS libraries, and the semantics for
interacting with
Open a bug task for precise.
** Also affects: openafs (Ubuntu Precise)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Changed in: openafs (Ubuntu Precise)
Status: New = Confirmed
** Changed in: openafs (Ubuntu Precise)
Importance: Undecided = High
** Changed in: openafs (Ubuntu)
Status changed to 'Confirmed' because the bug affects multiple users.
** Changed in: openafs (Ubuntu)
Status: New = Confirmed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1206387
Title:
I just installed Raring HWE thus updating to the 3.8 kernel. Now I am
also affected by this incompatibilty. Is it possible to get OpenAFS
1.6.5 in the standard repo? Or is there a recomended third party repo
for OpenAFS?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
https://launchpad.net/~openafs/+archive/stable has the current version
for all supported Ubuntu releases.
But yeah, I think the only real solution is to get OpenAFS 1.6.5 into
precise universe. This is a patch for backporting the current OpenAFS
package to precise.
** Patch added:
The attachment openafs_1.6.5-1ubuntu0.12.04.1.debdiff seems to be a
debdiff. The ubuntu-sponsors team has been subscribed to the bug report
so that they can review and hopefully sponsor the debdiff. If the
attachment isn't a patch, please remove the patch flag from the
attachment, remove the
** Tags removed: need-duplicate-check
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1206387
Title:
openafs-modules-dkms 1.6.1-1+ubuntu0.2: module FTBFS on 3.8.0
To manage notifications about this
Hmm. We’re going to need to cherry-pick _a lot_ of patches to backport
kernel 3.8 support to OpenAFS 1.6.1. I count at least 22 (on top of the
ones we already took for kernel 3.5):
5842f85 afsd: include sys/resource.h in afsd_kernel.c
54db9af Linux: bypass: consolidate copy_page macros into a
50 matches
Mail list logo
