Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.debian.user > #263538
| From | Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.debian.user |
| Subject | Re: Why is bullseye-backports recommended on bookworm? |
| Date | 2023-11-14 22:30 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <HA98R-5t9T-5@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <HA0oV-5o04-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <HA4Vz-5qzF-13@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On 2023-11-14 23:54:31 +0700, Max Nikulin wrote:
> On 14/11/2023 19:00, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > To my surprise, reportbug asks me to use bullseye-backports
> > (= oldstable-backports) on my bookworm (= stable) machine:
>
> Might it happen that you have bullseye-backports in apt sources.list?
No, and this is actually the complaint of reportbug, which wants
me to add it.
> apt policy
Package files:
100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
release a=now
500 file:/var/local/apt ./ Packages
release c=
900 http://debug.mirrors.debian.org/debian-debug proposed-updates-debug/main amd64 Packages
release v=12-updates,o=Debian,a=proposed-updates-debug,n=bookworm-proposed-updates-debug,l=Debian debug,c=main,b=amd64
origin debug.mirrors.debian.org
900 http://debug.mirrors.debian.org/debian-debug stable-debug/main amd64 Packages
release v=12.2,o=Debian,a=stable-debug,n=bookworm-debug,l=Debian debug,c=main,b=amd64
origin debug.mirrors.debian.org
500 http://debug.mirrors.debian.org/debian-debug unstable-debug/main amd64 Packages
release o=Debian,a=unstable-debug,n=sid-debug,l=Debian debug,c=main,b=amd64
origin debug.mirrors.debian.org
1 https://ftp.debian.org/debian experimental/main amd64 Packages
release o=Debian,a=experimental,n=rc-buggy,l=Debian,c=main,b=amd64
origin ftp.debian.org
500 https://ftp.debian.org/debian unstable/non-free-firmware amd64 Packages
release o=Debian,a=unstable,n=sid,l=Debian,c=non-free-firmware,b=amd64
origin ftp.debian.org
500 https://ftp.debian.org/debian unstable/non-free amd64 Packages
release o=Debian,a=unstable,n=sid,l=Debian,c=non-free,b=amd64
origin ftp.debian.org
500 https://ftp.debian.org/debian unstable/contrib amd64 Packages
release o=Debian,a=unstable,n=sid,l=Debian,c=contrib,b=amd64
origin ftp.debian.org
500 https://ftp.debian.org/debian unstable/main amd64 Packages
release o=Debian,a=unstable,n=sid,l=Debian,c=main,b=amd64
origin ftp.debian.org
500 https://ftp.debian.org/debian testing/non-free-firmware amd64 Packages
release o=Debian,a=testing,n=trixie,l=Debian,c=non-free-firmware,b=amd64
origin ftp.debian.org
500 https://ftp.debian.org/debian testing/non-free amd64 Packages
release o=Debian,a=testing,n=trixie,l=Debian,c=non-free,b=amd64
origin ftp.debian.org
500 https://ftp.debian.org/debian testing/contrib amd64 Packages
release o=Debian,a=testing,n=trixie,l=Debian,c=contrib,b=amd64
origin ftp.debian.org
500 https://ftp.debian.org/debian testing/main amd64 Packages
release o=Debian,a=testing,n=trixie,l=Debian,c=main,b=amd64
origin ftp.debian.org
900 https://ftp.debian.org/debian stable-updates/main amd64 Packages
release v=12-updates,o=Debian,a=stable-updates,n=bookworm-updates,l=Debian,c=main,b=amd64
origin ftp.debian.org
900 https://security.debian.org/debian-security stable-security/non-free-firmware amd64 Packages
release v=12,o=Debian,a=stable-security,n=bookworm-security,l=Debian-Security,c=non-free-firmware,b=amd64
origin security.debian.org
900 https://security.debian.org/debian-security stable-security/contrib amd64 Packages
release v=12,o=Debian,a=stable-security,n=bookworm-security,l=Debian-Security,c=contrib,b=amd64
origin security.debian.org
900 https://security.debian.org/debian-security stable-security/main amd64 Packages
release v=12,o=Debian,a=stable-security,n=bookworm-security,l=Debian-Security,c=main,b=amd64
origin security.debian.org
900 https://ftp.debian.org/debian stable/non-free-firmware amd64 Packages
release v=12.2,o=Debian,a=stable,n=bookworm,l=Debian,c=non-free-firmware,b=amd64
origin ftp.debian.org
900 https://ftp.debian.org/debian stable/non-free amd64 Packages
release v=12.2,o=Debian,a=stable,n=bookworm,l=Debian,c=non-free,b=amd64
origin ftp.debian.org
900 https://ftp.debian.org/debian stable/contrib amd64 Packages
release v=12.2,o=Debian,a=stable,n=bookworm,l=Debian,c=contrib,b=amd64
origin ftp.debian.org
900 https://ftp.debian.org/debian stable/main amd64 Packages
release v=12.2,o=Debian,a=stable,n=bookworm,l=Debian,c=main,b=amd64
origin ftp.debian.org
Pinned packages:
> apt policy linux-image-amd64
linux-image-amd64:
Installed: 6.1.55-1
Candidate: 6.1.55-1
Version table:
6.5.10-1 500
500 https://ftp.debian.org/debian testing/main amd64 Packages
500 https://ftp.debian.org/debian unstable/main amd64 Packages
*** 6.1.55-1 900
900 https://ftp.debian.org/debian stable/main amd64 Packages
100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
6.1.52-1 900
900 https://security.debian.org/debian-security stable-security/main amd64 Packages
No traces of bullseye in either output.
Note that /usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/reportbug/debbugs.py has
references to oldstable, and oldstable-backports in particular:
oldstable = utils.SUITE2CODENAME['oldstable']
oldstable_pu = oldstable + '-pu'
oldstable_backports = oldstable + '-backports'
oldstable_security = oldstable + '-security'
But it doesn't seem to be used.
/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/reportbug/checkversions.py has
# The page looks like this:
#
# $ wget -qO- 'https://qa.debian.org/madison.php?package=emacs&text=on&s=oldstable,stable,testing,unstable,experimental&a=source,all,x86_64'
but that's a comment.
--
Vincent Lefèvre <vincent@vinc17.net> - Web: <https://www.vinc17.net/>
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <https://www.vinc17.net/blog/>
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)
Back to linux.debian.user | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Why is bullseye-backports recommended on bookworm? Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net> - 2023-11-14 13:10 +0100
Re: Why is bullseye-backports recommended on bookworm? Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2023-11-14 13:40 +0100
Re: Why is bullseye-backports recommended on bookworm? Max Nikulin <manikulin@gmail.com> - 2023-11-14 18:00 +0100
Re: Why is bullseye-backports recommended on bookworm? Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net> - 2023-11-14 22:30 +0100
Re: Why is bullseye-backports recommended on bookworm? Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2023-11-14 22:40 +0100
Re: Why is bullseye-backports recommended on bookworm? Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net> - 2023-11-14 23:10 +0100
Re: Why is bullseye-backports recommended on bookworm? Max Nikulin <manikulin@gmail.com> - 2023-11-15 04:20 +0100
Re: Why is bullseye-backports recommended on bookworm? Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net> - 2023-11-15 18:10 +0100
Re: Why is bullseye-backports recommended on bookworm? didier gaumet <didier.gaumet@gmail.com> - 2023-11-15 09:00 +0100
Re: Why is bullseye-backports recommended on bookworm? Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net> - 2023-11-15 18:20 +0100
Re: Why is bullseye-backports recommended on bookworm? Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2023-11-15 17:40 +0100
Re: Why is bullseye-backports recommended on bookworm? Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net> - 2023-11-15 18:20 +0100
Re: Why is bullseye-backports recommended on bookworm? Tixy <tixy@yxit.co.uk> - 2023-11-15 19:10 +0100
Re: Why is bullseye-backports recommended on bookworm? Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net> - 2023-11-15 20:10 +0100
Re: Why is bullseye-backports recommended on bookworm? David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2023-11-15 21:00 +0100
Re: Why is bullseye-backports recommended on bookworm? Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net> - 2023-11-16 13:10 +0100
Re: Why is bullseye-backports recommended on bookworm? David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2023-11-16 21:10 +0100
Re: Why is bullseye-backports recommended on bookworm? Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net> - 2023-11-17 13:40 +0100
Re: Why is bullseye-backports recommended on bookworm? David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2023-11-18 07:30 +0100
Re: Why is bullseye-backports recommended on bookworm? Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net> - 2023-11-18 23:30 +0100
Re: Why is bullseye-backports recommended on bookworm? David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2023-11-19 06:50 +0100
Re: Why is bullseye-backports recommended on bookworm? Tixy <tixy@yxit.co.uk> - 2023-11-17 15:10 +0100
Re: Why is bullseye-backports recommended on bookworm? David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2023-11-18 07:30 +0100
Re: Why is bullseye-backports recommended on bookworm? Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> - 2023-11-18 15:20 +0100
Re: Why is bullseye-backports recommended on bookworm? steve <dlist@bluewin.ch> - 2023-11-18 15:40 +0100
Re: Why is bullseye-backports recommended on bookworm? David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2023-11-19 06:50 +0100
Re: Why is bullseye-backports recommended on bookworm? Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net> - 2023-11-18 23:40 +0100
Re: Why is bullseye-backports recommended on bookworm? David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2023-11-19 06:50 +0100
Re: Why is bullseye-backports recommended on bookworm? Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net> - 2023-11-20 11:20 +0100
Re: Why is bullseye-backports recommended on bookworm? David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2023-11-21 04:40 +0100
Re: Why is bullseye-backports recommended on bookworm? Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net> - 2023-11-16 13:30 +0100
Re: Why is bullseye-backports recommended on bookworm? Tim Woodall <debianuser@woodall.me.uk> - 2023-11-19 06:00 +0100
csiph-web