Hi Mathias, On Fri, Apr 28, 2023 at 02:32:10AM +0000, Mathias Gibbens wrote: > It looks like you're trying to install the version of lxd from > testing on a bullseye system? Mixing packages from different releases > isn't supported [1]. Furthermore, there hasn't yet been a stable
In fact this is supported as a partial upgrade. The situation of mixing packages from stable and testing is very common and happens during and dist-upgrade. > release of Debian that shipped lxd, so there's no way lxd-client might > be upgraded before lxc when upgrading from bullseye to bookworm. As > such, I don't know if it's really worthwhile to try to address this > situation that would only occur when the end-user has already broken > key assumptions about how their system is configured. That's indeed a better argument. It is non-trivial to rule out the scenario in bookworm Depends or Recommends lxd and thus pulls lxd into the upgrade scenario. > The packaging of lxc was updated during the bookworm development > cycle to properly name its bash completion file and de-conflict with > lxd packaging [2]. Upgrading lxc packages from bullseye -> bookworm > should work smoothly; after the upgrade is complete users will then > also be able to `apt install lxd` if they so wish, and they won't > encounter the packaging conflict. This is a good reason for why the effects should be minor. It still is not clear whether something in the upgrade would be able to pull lxd and thus trigger the situation. In any case, the reasoning seems sufficient to me to downgrade the severity to important. After bookworm is released, the bug can be closed in any case as we don't support skip upgrades. > Does that address your concern? Partially. Helmut
