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

Groups > linux.debian.kernel > #86357 > unrolled thread

Re: Salsa CI job 'missing-breaks' to be enabled by default starting March 1st

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

  Re: Salsa CI job 'missing-breaks' to be enabled by default starting  March 1st NoisyCoil <noisycoil@disroot.org> - 2025-03-06 16:00 +0100
    Re: Salsa CI job 'missing-breaks' to be enabled by default starting  March 1st Bastian Blank <waldi@debian.org> - 2025-03-06 17:30 +0100
      Re: Salsa CI job 'missing-breaks' to be enabled by default starting  March 1st NoisyCoil <noisycoil@disroot.org> - 2025-03-06 17:30 +0100
        Re: Salsa CI job 'missing-breaks' to be enabled by default starting  March 1st Bastian Blank <waldi@debian.org> - 2025-03-06 18:10 +0100

#86357 — Re: Salsa CI job 'missing-breaks' to be enabled by default starting March 1st

On 06/03/25 14:25, Lorenzo wrote:
> Hello Otto,
> 
> [please keep me in CC, I'm not subscribed]
> 
>> Salsa CI has had for many years the job 'missing-breaks' that
>> complements piuparts by checking that the files a package introduce
>> don't clash with files shipped by any other package in the
>> distribution without having proper Breaks/Replaces in the
>> `debian/control` file. This job works well, being quick to run and has
>> had zero false positives in our experience.
> In salsa CI now I see:
> 
> $ check_for_missing_breaks_replaces.py -o ${WORKING_DIR}/missing_breaks.xml --changes-file ${WORKING_DIR}/*.changes
> [ERROR] Missing Breaks/Replaces found
> [ERROR] runit-init conflicts with init-system-helpers files: {'/usr/share/man/man8/invoke-rc.d.8.gz', '/usr/sbin/service', '/usr/sbin/invoke-rc.d', '/usr/share/man/man8/service.8.gz'}
> Uploading artifacts for failed job
> 
> this looks like false positive, file are in fact diverted. Does the test
> check for for diversions?
> 
>> ## Schedule
>>
>> 1. March 1st: Enable this job by default, but in allow_failure mode,
>> making Salsa CI yellow on packages that fail on this job
>> 2. March 31st: Remove the allow_failure mode, potentially making the
>> Salsa CI red for packages that fail on this job
> Could you please consider delaying 2. until diversion are properly
> detected?

Another instance of diversions not being detected is in linux's pipeline 
[1,2]: linux-libc-dev and oss4-dev both install 
/usr/include/linux/soundcard.h, oss4-dev diverts it, missing-break 
fails. If my understanding is correct, this will make all unstable/exp 
(oss4-dev is in unstable only) src:linux pipelines break starting March 
31st.

I agree that diversions should be detected.


[1] https://salsa.debian.org/kernel-team/linux/-/jobs/7205419
[2] https://salsa.debian.org/kernel-team/linux/-/jobs/7182906

 > Best Regards,
 > Lorenzo

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#86360

On Thu, Mar 06, 2025 at 03:52:54PM +0100, NoisyCoil wrote:
> Another instance of diversions not being detected is in linux's pipeline
> [1,2]: linux-libc-dev and oss4-dev both install
> /usr/include/linux/soundcard.h, oss4-dev diverts it, missing-break fails. If
> my understanding is correct, this will make all unstable/exp (oss4-dev is in
> unstable only) src:linux pipelines break starting March 31st.

Open an serious bug report against oss4-dev.  No need to wait, it needs
to go.

Bastian

-- 
Beam me up, Scotty!  It ate my phaser!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#86361

On 06/03/25 17:09, Bastian Blank wrote:
> Open an serious bug report against oss4-dev.  No need to wait, it needs
> to go.

oss4-dev is fine (unless diversions of files in linux-libc-dev are 
forbidden): oss4-dev is correctly diverting the header, as a consequence 
it needs not Break or Conflict with linux-libc-dev.

The issue here is that the new missing-breaks pipeline job has no clue 
that packages are correctly diverting files, and it flags as missing 
Breaks packages which, in fact, do not miss Breaks because they aren't 
supposed to have any.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#86362

On Thu, Mar 06, 2025 at 05:23:00PM +0100, NoisyCoil wrote:
> oss4-dev is fine (unless diversions of files in linux-libc-dev are
> forbidden): oss4-dev is correctly diverting the header, as a consequence it
> needs not Break or Conflict with linux-libc-dev.

linux-libc-dev defines the interface the kernel provides.  Random
packages overriding that makes for nasty surprises.

So there are multiple solutions:
- Rename the header and move out of the linux dir.
- Move the header outside of /usr/include and explicitely use this
  directory in the include path.

> The issue here is that the new missing-breaks pipeline job has no clue that
> packages are correctly diverting files, and it flags as missing Breaks
> packages which, in fact, do not miss Breaks because they aren't supposed to
> have any.

Because diverts are kind of sledgehammers.  Without coordination they
break stuff.

Bastian

-- 
Beam me up, Scotty!  It ate my phaser!

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

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

csiph-web