Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.kernel > #81946 > unrolled thread

Bug#1064838: New package names break APT safety features, ability to co-install different ABIs

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Bug#1064838: New package names break APT safety features, ability to co-install different ABIs Julian Andres Klode <jak@debian.org> - 2024-02-26 14:40 +0100

#81946 — Bug#1064838: New package names break APT safety features, ability to co-install different ABIs

On Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 02:20:41PM +0100, Julian Andres Klode wrote:
> Source: linux
> Severity: serious
> X-Debbugs-Cc: jak@debian.org
> 
> After we had discussed the new proposal a couple months ago and were
> left with severe open questions and concerns it seems that these have
> been ignored and the packages uploaded anyway, breaking APT's algorithm
> that ensures the currently booted kernel is not offered for removal, as
> well as possibly others.
> 
> In addition, this means that the ABI changes within the same package
> names, causing different ABIs to no longer be co-installable, which can
> have drastic effect on thef function of systems:
> 
> - modules will fail to load until you reboot
> - modules needed to reboot will fail to load until you reboot (if any)
> 
> I do not believe fucking up our users for convenience of the maintainers
> and lacking of tools on the ftpmaster side to automatically approve new
> ABI renames is the right call here.
> 
> As such if this change is not reverted, I intend to reassign this to
> the technical committee for deliberation.

This is a followup to the discussion in
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1040901

which we discussed all this in October all these concerns were already
raised in, and lots of open questions remained that we were nowhere near
ready to do this even if we all agreed that was the right move.

-- 
debian developer - deb.li/jak | jak-linux.org - free software dev
ubuntu core developer                              i speak de, en

[toc] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.kernel

csiph-web