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

Groups > linux.debian.user > #223369 > unrolled thread

SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value 'unstable' is invalid for APT::Default-Release

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

Contents

  SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value 'unstable' is invalid  for APT::Default-Release David <bouncingcats@gmail.com> - 2020-06-12 14:10 +0200
    Re: SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value 'unstable' is  invalid for APT::Default-Release David <bouncingcats@gmail.com> - 2020-06-12 15:30 +0200
      Re: SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value 'unstable' is  invalid for APT::Default-Release Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2020-06-12 15:50 +0200
    Re: SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value 'unstable' is  invalid for APT::Default-Release Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2020-06-12 15:50 +0200
      Re: SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value 'unstable' is  invalid for APT::Default-Release Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2020-06-12 17:20 +0200
        Re: SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value 'unstable' is  invalid for APT::Default-Release Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2020-06-12 17:30 +0200
          Re: SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value 'unstable' is  invalid for APT::Default-Release Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2020-06-12 18:10 +0200
            Re: SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value 'unstable' is  invalid for APT::Default-Release Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2020-06-12 18:20 +0200
              Re: SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value 'unstable' is  invalid for APT::Default-Release Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2020-06-12 18:40 +0200
                Re: SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value 'unstable' is  invalid for APT::Default-Release Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2020-06-12 18:40 +0200
                Re: SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value 'unstable' is  invalid for APT::Default-Release <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2020-06-12 18:40 +0200
                  Re: SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value 'unstable' is  invalid for APT::Default-Release Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2020-06-12 18:50 +0200
                    Re: SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value 'unstable' is  invalid for APT::Default-Release <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2020-06-12 19:00 +0200
                  Re: SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value 'unstable' is  invalid for APT::Default-Release Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2020-06-12 19:10 +0200
                  Re: SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value 'unstable' is  invalid for APT::Default-Release Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2020-06-12 19:10 +0200
                    Re: SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value 'unstable' is  invalid for APT::Default-Release <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2020-06-12 19:20 +0200
                      Re: SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value 'unstable' is  invalid for APT::Default-Release Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2020-06-12 19:40 +0200
                        Re: SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value 'unstable' is  invalid for APT::Default-Release Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2020-06-12 20:00 +0200
                Re: SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value 'unstable' is  invalid for APT::Default-Release steve <dlist@bluewin.ch> - 2020-06-12 18:50 +0200
          Re: SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value 'unstable' is  invalid for APT::Default-Release Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2020-06-13 11:10 +0200
            Re: SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value 'unstable' is  invalid for APT::Default-Release Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2020-06-13 11:30 +0200
              Re: SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value 'unstable' is  invalid for APT::Default-Release Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2020-06-13 12:00 +0200
                Re: SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value 'unstable' is  invalid for APT::Default-Release Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2020-06-13 12:10 +0200
    Re: SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value 'unstable' is  invalid for APT::Default-Release Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2020-06-12 18:10 +0200
      [solved] Re: SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value  'unstable' is invalid for APT::Default-Release David <bouncingcats@gmail.com> - 2020-06-13 07:40 +0200
        Re: [solved] Re: SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value  'unstable' is invalid for APT::Default-Release <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2020-06-13 10:00 +0200
          Re: [solved] Re: SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value  'unstable' is invalid for APT::Default-Release David <bouncingcats@gmail.com> - 2020-06-23 05:20 +0200
        Re: [solved] Re: SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value  'unstable' is invalid for APT::Default-Release Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2020-06-13 11:00 +0200
          Re: [solved] Re: SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value  'unstable' is invalid for APT::Default-Release David <bouncingcats@gmail.com> - 2020-06-23 05:20 +0200
        Re: [solved] Re: SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value  'unstable' is invalid for APT::Default-Release Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2020-06-14 15:10 +0200
          Re: [solved] Re: SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value  'unstable' is invalid for APT::Default-Release David <bouncingcats@gmail.com> - 2020-06-23 05:20 +0200

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#223369 — SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value 'unstable' is invalid for APT::Default-Release

Hi, on buster, I'm having a problem using the wiki instructions
https://wiki.debian.org/SimpleBackportCreation
specifically the 3 steps under the subheading
"Add source package entries for the testing distribution"
Although in my case I am seeking to obtain the source package
from unstable, not testing.

Per step 1, I add a temporary unstable deb-src line so that my
/etc/apt/sources.list becomes (comments removed, see last line):
$ cat /etc/apt/sources.list
deb http://approx:9999/debian/ buster main non-free contrib
deb http://security.debian.org/debian-security buster/updates main
contrib non-free
deb http://approx:9999/debian/ buster-updates main contrib non-free
deb http://approx:9999/debian/ buster-backports main contrib non-free
deb-src http://approx:9999/debian/ unstable main contrib non-free
$

Per step 2, I run apt update:
# apt update
Hit:1 http://approx:9999/debian buster InRelease
Hit:2 http://security.debian.org/debian-security buster/updates InRelease
Hit:3 http://approx:9999/debian buster-updates InRelease
Hit:4 http://approx:9999/debian buster-backports InRelease
Get:5 http://approx:9999/debian unstable InRelease [146 kB]
Get:6 http://approx:9999/debian unstable/contrib Sources [47.3 kB]
Get:7 http://approx:9999/debian unstable/non-free Sources [84.9 kB]
Get:8 http://approx:9999/debian unstable/main Sources [8,620 kB]
Fetched 8,899 kB in 7s (1,187 kB/s)
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
All packages are up to date.
#

But step 3 fails:
$ apt source -t unstable cgdb
Reading package lists... Done
E: The value 'unstable' is invalid for APT::Default-Release as such a
release is not available in the sources
E: Unable to find a source package for
$ apt source -t testing cgdb
Reading package lists... Done
E: The value 'testing' is invalid for APT::Default-Release as such a
release is not available in the sources
E: Unable to find a source package for
$

What is wrong, and how do I fix it?

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#223370 — Re: SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value 'unstable' is invalid for APT::Default-Release

The next step in the instructions also does not work for me
(on buster):

# mk-build-deps --install --remove
Usage:
    mk-build-deps --help|--version

    mk-build-deps [options] control file | package name ...
#

I thought those instructions are intended for a person
who is running stable and wants to backport a package.
Am I wrong about that?

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

#223373 — Re: SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value 'unstable' is invalid for APT::Default-Release

On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 11:23:27PM +1000, David wrote:
> The next step in the instructions also does not work for me
> (on buster):
> 
> # mk-build-deps --install --remove
> Usage:
>     mk-build-deps --help|--version
> 
>     mk-build-deps [options] control file | package name ...

In your case it's:

sudo apt build-dep cgdb


> I thought those instructions are intended for a person
> who is running stable and wants to backport a package.
> Am I wrong about that?

I can only assume that it worked that way for the author of the page. It
sure was not for me.

Reco

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

#223372 — Re: SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value 'unstable' is invalid for APT::Default-Release

	Hi.

On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 10:02:12PM +1000, David wrote:
> Per step 1, I add a temporary unstable deb-src line so that my
> /etc/apt/sources.list becomes (comments removed, see last line):
...
> deb-src http://approx:9999/debian/ unstable main contrib non-free

For "apt source" to work you need to add two lines:

deb     http://approx:9999/debian/ unstable main contrib non-free
deb-src http://approx:9999/debian/ unstable main contrib non-free

Just do not run "apt upgrade" and remove these as soon as they aren't
needed anymore.

Reco

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

#223375 — Re: SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value 'unstable' is invalid for APT::Default-Release

On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 04:40:22PM +0300, Reco wrote:
> For "apt source" to work you need to add two lines:
> 
> deb     http://approx:9999/debian/ unstable main contrib non-free
> deb-src http://approx:9999/debian/ unstable main contrib non-free

Incorrect.  Do *not* add a "deb" line for unstable to a stable
system.  Only add the "deb-src" line.

Beyond that, the OP is using some local mirror, so only they will know
what the correct sources.list lines should be.

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

#223376 — Re: SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value 'unstable' is invalid for APT::Default-Release

	Hi.

On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 11:15:26AM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 04:40:22PM +0300, Reco wrote:
> > For "apt source" to work you need to add two lines:
> > 
> > deb     http://approx:9999/debian/ unstable main contrib non-free
> > deb-src http://approx:9999/debian/ unstable main contrib non-free
> 
> Incorrect.

Try it first (a hint - it works with "apt source").


>  Do *not* add a "deb" line for unstable to a stable
> system.  Only add the "deb-src" line.

And that one too (a hint - it does not).


> Beyond that, the OP is using some local mirror,

Also please do some research on what approx is.

Reco

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

#223377 — Re: SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value 'unstable' is invalid for APT::Default-Release

On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 06:27:45PM +0300, Reco wrote:
> >  Do *not* add a "deb" line for unstable to a stable
> > system.  Only add the "deb-src" line.
> 
> And that one too (a hint - it does not).

It does not *what*?  What the hell are you talking about?

What it does is add UNSTABLE BINARY PACKAGES to your LISTS.

So the next time you do an "apt-get upgrade" or "apt-get dist-upgrade"
or "apt upgrade" or "apt full-upgrade" you are going to introduce
unstable binary packages onto your stable system.

We call this a FrankenDebian.

Do NOT do this.

> > Beyond that, the OP is using some local mirror,
> 
> Also please do some research on what approx is.

Fuck off if you have nothing useful to say.

unicorn:~$ host approx
Host approx not found: 3(NXDOMAIN)

There.  Research managed.  It's a domain name with no dots in it, so
it's completely local to the OP's network.  There's no way anyone out
here in the rest of the world can know about it.

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

#223379 — Re: SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value 'unstable' is invalid for APT::Default-Release

	Hi.

On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 12:02:11PM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 06:27:45PM +0300, Reco wrote:
> > >  Do *not* add a "deb" line for unstable to a stable
> > > system.  Only add the "deb-src" line.
> > 
> > And that one too (a hint - it does not).
> 
> It does not *what*?  What the hell are you talking about?

Read OP original e-mail for the example of apt not working.


> What it does is add UNSTABLE BINARY PACKAGES to your LISTS.

My, my. I clearly touched a nerve there.


> So the next time you do an "apt-get upgrade" or "apt-get dist-upgrade"

Please read my original e-mail once again.


> > > Beyond that, the OP is using some local mirror,
> > 
> > Also please do some research on what approx is.
> 
> Fuck off if you have nothing useful to say.

Likewise, pal. Your contributions to this thread are useless so far.
Mine ain't.


> unicorn:~$ host approx
> Host approx not found: 3(NXDOMAIN)

LOL. Sober up first, then learn how to use apt.

Reco

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

#223381 — Re: SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value 'unstable' is invalid for APT::Default-Release

On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 07:15:20PM +0300, Reco wrote:
> > unicorn:~$ host approx
> > Host approx not found: 3(NXDOMAIN)
> 
> LOL. Sober up first, then learn how to use apt.

unicorn:~$ man sources.list | grep approx
unicorn:~$ man apt | grep approx
unicorn:~$ man apt-get | grep approx
unicorn:~$ 

If you have something positive to contribute, please do.

You have given DANGEROUS advice.  I am YELLING AT YOU because of that.

Stop giving dangerous advice!

How the fuck are you not able to grasp this?

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

#223383 — Re: SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value 'unstable' is invalid for APT::Default-Release

On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 12:33:02PM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 07:15:20PM +0300, Reco wrote:
> > > unicorn:~$ host approx
> > > Host approx not found: 3(NXDOMAIN)
> > 
> > LOL. Sober up first, then learn how to use apt.
> 
> unicorn:~$ man sources.list | grep approx
> unicorn:~$ man apt | grep approx
> unicorn:~$ man apt-get | grep approx

OLOLO. Try "apt show approx".

Reco

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

#223384 — Re: SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value 'unstable' is invalid for APT::Default-Release

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 12:33:02PM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 07:15:20PM +0300, Reco wrote:
> > > unicorn:~$ host approx
> > > Host approx not found: 3(NXDOMAIN)
> > 
> > LOL. Sober up first, then learn how to use apt.

Ugh.

> unicorn:~$ man sources.list | grep approx
> unicorn:~$ man apt | grep approx
> unicorn:~$ man apt-get | grep approx
> unicorn:~$ 

apt show approx will help. It's an APT proxy/cache (I'm more familiar
with apt-cacher-ng though)

More @#%$*

> Stop giving dangerous advice!
> 
> How the fuck are you not able to grasp this?

Hey, folks. Cool down. Pretty please?

Cheers
-- t

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

#223385 — Re: SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value 'unstable' is invalid for APT::Default-Release

	Hi.

On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 06:38:09PM +0200, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 12:33:02PM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 07:15:20PM +0300, Reco wrote:
> > > > unicorn:~$ host approx
> > > > Host approx not found: 3(NXDOMAIN)
> > > 
> > > LOL. Sober up first, then learn how to use apt.
> 
> Ugh.

They say that one can prove anything by creative usage of quoting, and
yours is a fine example of it. Here's better one:

> > > > Beyond that, the OP is using some local mirror,
> > >
> > > Also please do some research on what approx is.
> >
> > Fuck off if you have nothing useful to say.
> 
> Likewise, pal. Your contributions to this thread are useless so far.
> Mine ain't.
> 
> 
> > unicorn:~$ host approx
> > Host approx not found: 3(NXDOMAIN)
> 
> LOL. Sober up first, then learn how to use apt.


> Hey, folks. Cool down. Pretty please?

Merely giving a troll enough rope to hang himself.

Reco

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

#223387 — Re: SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value 'unstable' is invalid for APT::Default-Release

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 07:42:22PM +0300, Reco wrote:

[...]

> They say that one can prove anything by creative usage of quoting, and
> yours is a fine example of it. Here's better one:

Sorry. I wasn't trying to "prove" anything. Much less to make you or
anyone look bad.

[...]

> > Hey, folks. Cool down. Pretty please?
> 
> Merely giving a troll enough rope to hang himself.

I'm just too dense to understand what you write (Who's giving the
rope? Who's the troll?). But I'm not sure either I really want
to know.

I had just the impression that the tone got somewhat... out of
control. Maybe Greg and you are enjoying it (then, maybe not),
but I'm sure there are lots of folks around here who aren't.

And don't get me wrong: I do appreciate both of you for your
often knowledgeable posts (otherwise I'd just care less).

Cheers
-- t

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

#223388 — Re: SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value 'unstable' is invalid for APT::Default-Release

On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 12:59:47PM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> After the compiling, it started running a test suite.  One of the
> tests failed.  So, this particular package might not have been as
> good a choice as I had hoped, for a simple demonstration of the
> process.

I was too pessimistic.  The test suite finally stopped running, and
it went on with the remaining build steps, despite the test(s) that
failed.

==================
   dh_builddeb -O--no-parallel
	dpkg-deb --root-owner-group --build debian/ksh ..
	dpkg-deb --root-owner-group --build debian/.debhelper/ksh/dbgsym-root ..
dpkg-deb: building package 'ksh' in '../ksh_2020.0.0-5_amd64.deb'.
dpkg-deb: building package 'ksh-dbgsym' in '../ksh-dbgsym_2020.0.0-5_amd64.deb'.
 dpkg-genbuildinfo
 dpkg-genchanges  >../ksh_2020.0.0-5_amd64.changes
dpkg-genchanges: info: not including original source code in upload
 dpkg-source --after-build .
dpkg-buildpackage: info: binary and diff upload (original source NOT included)
==================

So now we go up to the parent directory and see:

==================
unicorn:/var/tmp/clean/ksh-2020.0.0$ cd ..
unicorn:/var/tmp/clean$ ls -lart
total 5284
-rw-r--r--  1 greg greg 2022861 Oct 10  2019 ksh_2020.0.0.orig.tar.gz
drwxrwxrwt  6 root root    4096 Jun 12 12:50 ../
-rw-r--r--  1 greg greg   20560 Jun 12 12:53 ksh_2020.0.0-5.debian.tar.xz
-rw-r--r--  1 greg greg    1037 Jun 12 12:53 ksh_2020.0.0-5.dsc
drwxr-xr-x 14 greg greg    4096 Jun 12 12:53 ksh-2020.0.0/
-rw-r--r--  1 greg greg 2526112 Jun 12 13:01 ksh-dbgsym_2020.0.0-5_amd64.deb
-rw-r--r--  1 greg greg  806320 Jun 12 13:01 ksh_2020.0.0-5_amd64.deb
-rw-r--r--  1 greg greg    6090 Jun 12 13:01 ksh_2020.0.0-5_amd64.buildinfo
-rw-r--r--  1 greg greg    2133 Jun 12 13:01 ksh_2020.0.0-5_amd64.changes
drwxr-xr-x  3 greg greg    4096 Jun 12 13:01 ./
==================

There's our backported package.

That's how it's done.

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

#223389 — Re: SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value 'unstable' is invalid for APT::Default-Release

On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 06:38:09PM +0200, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
> apt show approx will help. It's an APT proxy/cache (I'm more familiar
> with apt-cacher-ng though)

Oh, that actually looks useful.  (Also, you actually gave *useful
information*, that was not simply "do research on this half a word
with zero context".)

So, the OP has a caching proxy layer that needs to be taken into
consideration when trying to diagnose the actual issues.

Of course, none of this changes that fact that one DOES NOT add an
unstable "deb" source to sources.list when building backports.  That
is simply wrong, as I have to keep restating, because certain people
do not seem to accept it.  And it's DANGEROUS!

Now, let's try to figure out how to do a backport so we can help the OP,
shall we?

First step, we have to choose a package to backport.  Ideally, something
small and not difficult to compile... sl?  No, that's basically the
same version in both stable and unstable.  ksh?  Ok, ksh looks like a
reasonable candidate.

ii  ksh            93u+20120801-3.4 amd64        Real, AT&T version of the Korn shell

https://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=ksh says it's at version
2020.something in sid, so that'll be easy to spot.

I'm starting with this sources.list file:

===============================
deb http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ buster main contrib non-free
deb-src http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ buster main contrib non-free

deb http://security.debian.org/debian-security buster/updates main contrib non-free
deb-src http://security.debian.org/debian-security buster/updates main contrib non-free

deb http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ buster-updates main contrib non-free
deb-src http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ buster-updates main contrib non-free
===============================

Now, according to the instructions, I need to add a deb-src line for
sid, and also the buster-backports binary lines.  So, let's edit
sources.list....

===============================
deb http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ buster main contrib non-free
deb-src http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ buster main contrib non-free

deb http://security.debian.org/debian-security buster/updates main contrib non-free
deb-src http://security.debian.org/debian-security buster/updates main contrib non-free

deb http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ buster-updates main contrib non-free
deb-src http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ buster-updates main contrib non-free

deb http://deb.debian.org/debian buster-backports main
deb-src http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ sid main
===============================

There.  Now, we "apt-get update", and change to a clean working
directory, and try to retrieve the source:

===============================
unicorn:~$ mkdir /var/tmp/clean
unicorn:~$ cd "$_"
unicorn:/var/tmp/clean$ apt-get source ksh
Reading package lists... Done
NOTICE: 'ksh' packaging is maintained in the 'Git' version control system at:
https://salsa.debian.org/debian/ksh.git
Please use:
git clone https://salsa.debian.org/debian/ksh.git
to retrieve the latest (possibly unreleased) updates to the package.
Need to get 2,045 kB of source archives.
Get:1 http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian sid/main ksh 2020.0.0-5 (dsc) [1,960 B]
Get:2 http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian sid/main ksh 2020.0.0-5 (tar) [2,023 kB]
Get:3 http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian sid/main ksh 2020.0.0-5 (diff) [20.6 kB] 
Fetched 2,045 kB in 8s (254 kB/s)                                              
dpkg-source: info: extracting ksh in ksh-2020.0.0
dpkg-source: info: unpacking ksh_2020.0.0.orig.tar.gz
dpkg-source: info: unpacking ksh_2020.0.0-5.debian.tar.xz
dpkg-source: info: using patch list from debian/patches/series
dpkg-source: info: applying 0001-List-only-supported-names-for-ksh.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying 0002-Change-ultimate-fallback-editor-for-fc.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying 0003-Spelling-fix-in-doc.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying 0004-Set-USER-when-running-tests.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying 0005-Skip-API-test-if-build-type-not-debug.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying 0006-Use-unused-fd-for-fsync-test.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying 0007-Skip-test-if-homedir-not-found.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying 0008-CVE-2019-14868.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying 0009-Fix-rksh-issue-1479.patch
===============================

Looks good so far!

Now we cd into the directory, and install the build dependencies....

===============================
unicorn:/var/tmp/clean$ cd ksh-2020.0.0/
unicorn:/var/tmp/clean/ksh-2020.0.0$ sudo apt-get build-dep ksh
Reading package lists... Done
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree       
Reading state information... Done
The following NEW packages will be installed:
  dh-exec ed expect libtcl8.6 locales-all meson netcat-openbsd ninja-build
  tcl-expect tcl8.6
0 upgraded, 10 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
Need to get 12.6 MB of archives.
After this operation, 234 MB of additional disk space will be used.
Do you want to continue? [Y/n] y
Get:1 http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian buster/main amd64 dh-exec amd64 0.23.1 [26.3 kB]
Get:2 http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian buster/main amd64 ed amd64 1.15-1 [59.7 kB]
Get:3 http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian buster/main amd64 libtcl8.6 amd64 8.6.9+dfsg-2 [1,005 kB]
Get:4 http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian buster/main amd64 tcl8.6 amd64 8.6.9+dfsg-2 [123 kB]
Get:5 http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian buster/main amd64 tcl-expect amd64 5.45.4-2 [133 kB]
Get:6 http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian buster/main amd64 expect amd64 5.45.4-2 [166 kB]
Get:7 http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian buster/main amd64 locales-all amd64 2.28-10 [10.7 MB]
Get:8 http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian buster/main amd64 ninja-build amd64 1.8.2-1 [93.6 kB]
Get:9 http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian buster/main amd64 meson all 0.49.2-1 [281 kB]
Get:10 http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian buster/main amd64 netcat-openbsd amd64 1.195-2 [41.2 kB]
Fetched 12.6 MB in 32s (392 kB/s)                                              
Selecting previously unselected package dh-exec.
(Reading database ... 90149 files and directories currently installed.)
Preparing to unpack .../0-dh-exec_0.23.1_amd64.deb ...
Unpacking dh-exec (0.23.1) ...
Selecting previously unselected package ed.
Preparing to unpack .../1-ed_1.15-1_amd64.deb ...
Unpacking ed (1.15-1) ...
Selecting previously unselected package libtcl8.6:amd64.
Preparing to unpack .../2-libtcl8.6_8.6.9+dfsg-2_amd64.deb ...
Unpacking libtcl8.6:amd64 (8.6.9+dfsg-2) ...
Selecting previously unselected package tcl8.6.
Preparing to unpack .../3-tcl8.6_8.6.9+dfsg-2_amd64.deb ...
Unpacking tcl8.6 (8.6.9+dfsg-2) ...
Selecting previously unselected package tcl-expect:amd64.
Preparing to unpack .../4-tcl-expect_5.45.4-2_amd64.deb ...
Unpacking tcl-expect:amd64 (5.45.4-2) ...
Selecting previously unselected package expect.
Preparing to unpack .../5-expect_5.45.4-2_amd64.deb ...
Unpacking expect (5.45.4-2) ...
Selecting previously unselected package locales-all.
Preparing to unpack .../6-locales-all_2.28-10_amd64.deb ...
Unpacking locales-all (2.28-10) ...
Selecting previously unselected package ninja-build.
Preparing to unpack .../7-ninja-build_1.8.2-1_amd64.deb ...
Unpacking ninja-build (1.8.2-1) ...
Selecting previously unselected package meson.
Preparing to unpack .../8-meson_0.49.2-1_all.deb ...
Unpacking meson (0.49.2-1) ...
Selecting previously unselected package netcat-openbsd.
Preparing to unpack .../9-netcat-openbsd_1.195-2_amd64.deb ...
Unpacking netcat-openbsd (1.195-2) ...
Setting up netcat-openbsd (1.195-2) ...
update-alternatives: using /bin/nc.openbsd to provide /bin/nc (nc) in auto mode
Setting up dh-exec (0.23.1) ...
Setting up locales-all (2.28-10) ...
Setting up ninja-build (1.8.2-1) ...
Setting up ed (1.15-1) ...
Setting up libtcl8.6:amd64 (8.6.9+dfsg-2) ...
Setting up tcl8.6 (8.6.9+dfsg-2) ...
Setting up tcl-expect:amd64 (5.45.4-2) ...
Setting up meson (0.49.2-1) ...
Setting up expect (5.45.4-2) ...
Processing triggers for man-db (2.8.5-2) ...
Processing triggers for install-info (6.5.0.dfsg.1-4+b1) ...
Processing triggers for libc-bin (2.28-10) ...
===============================

And now, we try to build the package.

===============================
unicorn:/var/tmp/clean/ksh-2020.0.0$ dpkg-buildpackage -uc -us -rfakeroot
dpkg-buildpackage: info: source package ksh
dpkg-buildpackage: info: source version 2020.0.0-5
dpkg-buildpackage: info: source distribution unstable
dpkg-buildpackage: info: source changed by Thorsten Glaser <tg@mirbsd.de>
dpkg-buildpackage: info: host architecture amd64
 dpkg-source --before-build .
 debian/rules clean
dh clean --no-parallel
...
===============================

I won't show all of the output, because it's rather long.

After the compiling, it started running a test suite.  One of the
tests failed.  So, this particular package might not have been as
good a choice as I had hoped, for a simple demonstration of the
process.

Nevertheless, I am fairly confident that this *IS* the correct
process, in general.

Notice, and I know I am repeating myself OVER and OVER, but it is
apparently NECESSARY to do so, because certain people are spreading
dangerous lies: I DID NOT add a "deb" line for unstable!

DO NOT add a "deb" line for unstable!

I will keep repeating that as many times as it takes.  Because it's
freaking IMPORTANT.

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

#223390 — Re: SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value 'unstable' is invalid for APT::Default-Release

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 12:59:47PM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 06:38:09PM +0200, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
> > apt show approx will help. It's an APT proxy/cache (I'm more familiar
> > with apt-cacher-ng though)
> 
> Oh, that actually looks useful [...]

It sure is. I've played building images and packages for a foreign
architectures and I didn't want to punish the Debian servers (or
my DSL) for the same packages over and over again.

[...]

> Notice, and I know I am repeating myself OVER and OVER, but it is
> apparently NECESSARY to do so, because certain people are spreading
> dangerous lies: I DID NOT add a "deb" line for unstable!
> 
> DO NOT add a "deb" line for unstable!
> 
> I will keep repeating that as many times as it takes.  Because it's
> freaking IMPORTANT.

Just a hint: it'd be more empowering for your interlocutors if you
didn't just tell "don't do that" but rather what happens if they
do (my guess is that you're hinting at the danger to actually install
a binary package from unstable by accident -- but I can only guess).

Cheers
-- t

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

#223391 — Re: SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value 'unstable' is invalid for APT::Default-Release

> > DO NOT add a "deb" line for unstable!
> > 
> > I will keep repeating that as many times as it takes.  Because it's
> > freaking IMPORTANT.
> 
> Just a hint: it'd be more empowering for your interlocutors if you
> didn't just tell "don't do that" but rather what happens if they
> do (my guess is that you're hinting at the danger to actually install
> a binary package from unstable by accident -- but I can only guess).

My first message was quite polite.

https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2020/06/msg00426.html

My second message went into details about precisely *why* one does not
do this dangerous thing, but I was already pushed into attack mode,
because my initial polite message was treated with venom and scorn.

https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2020/06/msg00429.html

So, maybe I should have done a dry second attempt to educate the offending
person, rather than responding to the venom and scorn in kind.  But more
likely, a second polite message would just have been brushed off AGAIN.


P.S. Do not add a "deb" source for unstable when building backports.
It's unnecessary, it's not part of the instructions, and it leaves your
system poised to become a FrankenDebian, a nightmare, a mess, a disaster,
an unsupportable broken heap of bytes that can only be fixed by a
full reinstall.

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

#223392 — Re: SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value 'unstable' is invalid for APT::Default-Release

On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 01:32:52PM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> My first message was quite polite.
> 
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2020/06/msg00426.html

Your first message was factually incorrect *and* rude. 
I merely showed where you've mistaken.


> My second message went into details about precisely *why* one does not
> do this dangerous thing, but I was already pushed into attack mode,
> because my initial polite message was treated with venom and scorn.
> 
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2020/06/msg00429.html

Your second message was filled with CAPS, which is universally
recognised equivalent for shouting and screaming. Not the most farthest
thing from the "polite message", but close enough.


> So, maybe I should have done a dry second attempt to educate the offending
> person, rather than responding to the venom and scorn in kind.  But more
> likely, a second polite message would just have been brushed off AGAIN.

I'll take that as apology, let's leave it at that.

Reco

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

#223386 — Re: SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value 'unstable' is invalid for APT::Default-Release

Calm down Greg and after that have a look at

https://packages.debian.org/sid/approx

Thanks.

Steve



Le 12-06-2020, à 12:33:02 -0400, Greg Wooledge a écrit :

>On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 07:15:20PM +0300, Reco wrote:
>> > unicorn:~$ host approx
>> > Host approx not found: 3(NXDOMAIN)
>>
>> LOL. Sober up first, then learn how to use apt.
>
>unicorn:~$ man sources.list | grep approx
>unicorn:~$ man apt | grep approx
>unicorn:~$ man apt-get | grep approx
>unicorn:~$
>
>If you have something positive to contribute, please do.
>
>You have given DANGEROUS advice.  I am YELLING AT YOU because of that.
>
>Stop giving dangerous advice!
>
>How the fuck are you not able to grasp this?
>

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

#223419 — Re: SimpleBackportCreation attempt says: The value 'unstable' is invalid for APT::Default-Release

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Vi, 12 iun 20, 18:27:45, Reco wrote:
> 	Hi.
> 
> On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 11:15:26AM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 04:40:22PM +0300, Reco wrote:
> > > For "apt source" to work you need to add two lines:
> > > 
> > > deb     http://approx:9999/debian/ unstable main contrib non-free
> > > deb-src http://approx:9999/debian/ unstable main contrib non-free
> > 
> > Incorrect.

Just because it works it doesn't meant it's the "correct" way. What if 
the user gets interrupted and forgets to remove the deb..unstable line?

> Try it first (a hint - it works with "apt source").
> 
> 
> >  Do *not* add a "deb" line for unstable to a stable
> > system.  Only add the "deb-src" line.
> 
> And that one too (a hint - it does not).

It does (as has been demonstrated), just not with '-t unstable'.

> > Beyond that, the OP is using some local mirror,
> 
> Also please do some research on what approx is.

Without previous knowledge of 'approx' it's pretty difficult to make the 
connection from some internal host name to a Debian package name.

Your tone appears to be condescending, which I'm sure you didn't mean 
to.

Obligatory XKCD:

https://xkcd.com/1053/

Kind regards,
Andrei
-- 
http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser

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

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

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

csiph-web