Adam Borowski dixit:
>package would need to ship /etc/passwd and /etc/group them somehow divert
>them away so it's installed only the first time. On the other hand, it is
You cannot divert conffiles…
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubsc
Control: reassign -1 base-passwd
Control: retitle -1 makes base-files fail to install during bootstrap
Control: found -1 3.5.36
Control: fixed -1 3.5.37
On Fri, Nov 07, 2014 at 07:47:42PM +, Michael Tautschnig wrote:
> First of all thanks to everyone for the efforts to fix these problems. It
Processing control commands:
> reassign -1 base-passwd
Bug #767999 [dpkg] dpkg: Correct fix breaks bogus assumptions in old debootstrap
Bug reassigned from package 'dpkg' to 'base-passwd'.
No longer marked as found in versions dpkg/1.17.21 and dpkg/1.17.20.
Ignoring
Hello Guillem, All,
First of all thanks to everyone for the efforts to fix these problems. It seems
we've now got fixes in place both in (c)debootstrap and base-passwd, so
hopefully we're fine for the next few releases... :-)
On Fri, Nov 07, 2014 at 17:38:06 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote:
> On Fri,
ntroduces again an
> > unnecessary package queue stage, and such regression is acceptable if
> > it makes buggy bootstrappers work again. But a fixed debootstrap (and
> > maybe cdebootstrap if that fails too) should really be pushed to stable.
>
> I think you might want to h
Santiago Vila (2014-11-07):
> On Fri, 7 Nov 2014, Michael Tautschnig wrote:
>
> > To stick with Santiago's earlier wording, we are now shooting the next
> > messenger (this time dpkg, after first working hard against base-files).
>
> Indeed. I would not like to see dpkg as the next "victim" of t
On Fri, 7 Nov 2014, Michael Tautschnig wrote:
> To stick with Santiago's earlier wording, we are now shooting the next
> messenger (this time dpkg, after first working hard against base-files).
Indeed. I would not like to see dpkg as the next "victim" of this problem.
Being able to bootstrap jes
On Fri, 07 Nov 2014, Guillem Jover wrote:
> I'm going to revert the commit above (only in 1.17.x, it will be kept
> in 1.18.x), because it is very minimal, just reintroduces again an
> unnecessary package queue stage, and such regression is acceptable if
> it makes buggy bootstrappers work again. B
ackage queue stage, and such regression is acceptable if
> it makes buggy bootstrappers work again. But a fixed debootstrap (and
> maybe cdebootstrap if that fails too) should really be pushed to stable.
>
I think you might want to hold off on this revert. See
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=767999#73
and Adam's kind testing of that patch.
Best,
Michael
pgp23kcAkYfVZ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Hi,
On Fri, Nov 07, 2014 at 1:02:18 +0100, Adam Borowski wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 06, 2014 at 10:32:34PM +, Michael Tautschnig wrote:
> > > I tested your patch when debootstrapping from squeeze, it did work.
> > > Should
> > > I test some more scenarios (cdebootstrap? 2-phase cross-arch deboot
Processing control commands:
> severity -1 serious
Bug #767999 [dpkg] base-files: fails to install with pre-jessie debootstrap
Severity set to 'serious' from 'grave'
> retitle -1 dpkg: Correct fix breaks bogus assumptions in old debootstrap
Bug #767999 [dpkg] base-files:
Control: severity -1 serious
Control: retitle -1 dpkg: Correct fix breaks bogus assumptions in old
debootstrap
On Fri, 2014-11-07 at 02:33:48 +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Cyril Brulebois (2014-11-05):
> > But, from where I stand, several developers were actually checking facts
> > after I che
Control: tag -1 -patch
Control: reassign -1 dpkg 1.17.21
Control: affects -1 debootstrap
[ Context: debootstrap/wheezy is now unable to debootstrap either jessie
or sid. ]
Cyril Brulebois (2014-11-05):
> > I'm not calling Adam's proposal insane. His proposal is just wrong.
> > What I was calling
Processing control commands:
> tag -1 -patch
Bug #767999 [debootstrap] base-files: fails to install with pre-jessie
debootstrap
Removed tag(s) patch.
> reassign -1 dpkg 1.17.21
Bug #767999 [debootstrap] base-files: fails to install with pre-jessie
debootstrap
Bug reassigned from p
On Thu, Nov 06, 2014 at 10:32:34PM +, Michael Tautschnig wrote:
> > I tested your patch when debootstrapping from squeeze, it did work. Should
> > I test some more scenarios (cdebootstrap? 2-phase cross-arch debootstrap?
> > some other distro?) -- or do you think it should be safe?
>
> Cool,
On Thu, Nov 06, 2014 at 10:44:40PM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote:
> > B) If base-passwd violates policy, then base-passwd is buggy.
>
> I say it is, but since the only consumer that matters is base-files, it
> might be safer to change the latter.
The "only consumer that matters"? What do you mean?
On Thu, Nov 06, 2014 at 02:06:07PM +, Michael Tautschnig wrote:
> [ BCC'ing Santiago, Holger, Adam, Cyril ]
>
> Hi all,
>
> I'm refraining from quoting the preceding mails as most of you will have those
> in their inbox, and I'd rather summarise the situation right here:
>
> At least Santiag
Hi,
On Thu, Nov 06, 2014 at 22:44:40 +0100, Adam Borowski wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 06, 2014 at 02:06:07PM +, Michael Tautschnig wrote:
[...]
> > 1. Determine whether base-passwd is in line with policy on providing its
> > functionality as an "essential" package.
> > A) If it is, then debootstrap
On Thu, Nov 06, 2014 at 02:06:07PM +, Michael Tautschnig wrote:
> At least Santiago's and my opinion diverge on whether base-passwd is presently
> in line with policy on 3.8 Essential packages. Therefore the route from here
> appears to hinge on interpreting policy in one of two ways: my point
[ BCC'ing Santiago, Holger, Adam, Cyril ]
Hi all,
I'm refraining from quoting the preceding mails as most of you will have those
in their inbox, and I'd rather summarise the situation right here:
At least Santiago's and my opinion diverge on whether base-passwd is presently
in line with policy o
Note: dpkg 1.17.21 has migrated to testing, and, as a result, the
current debootstrap in wheezy is now unable to create chroots for both
jessie and sid (previously it was only sid and jessie still worked).
As of today, in jessie we still have base-files 7.6.
So, as I suspected, the recent changes
Santiago Vila (2014-11-05):
> Yes, I am upset, because I've explained too many times already why it
> is not a bug in base-files, and why trying to fix it in base-files
> would be a complete and ugly hack, and yet people keep filing bugs
> about base-files, killing the messenger, so to speak.
I'v
On Wed, Nov 05, 2014 at 11:04:55AM +0100, Holger Levsen wrote:
> On Mittwoch, 5. November 2014, Santiago Vila wrote:
> > Adam Borowski, STOP this insanity!
> > STOP IT!
>
> It seems to me that you are quite upset about this bug, yet I fail
> to see why, really.
Yes, I am upset, because I've expla
On Wed, 5 Nov 2014, Adam Borowski wrote:
> How do you propose changing debootstrap on already burned CDs?
I don't. Instead, those having a buggy version of debootstrap in a
burned CD should better try to find a non buggy version on Internet.
Proposing that we should make the entire Debian archiv
Hi Santiago,
On Mittwoch, 5. November 2014, Santiago Vila wrote:
> Adam Borowski, STOP this insanity!
> STOP IT!
It seems to me that you are quite upset about this bug, yet I fail to see why,
really. A bug is nothing bad, it's just an id to track things...
Also, you ignored a quite significant
reassign 767999 debootstrap
thanks
Adam Borowski, STOP this insanity!
STOP IT!
> > (And you should really read the full logs for Bug#766459 to understand
> > this instead of killing the messenger
>
> The guilty party for this bug is either base-files or base-passwd.
Wrong. It's debootstrap ins
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> reassign 767999 debootstrap
Bug #767999 [base-files] base-files: fails to install with pre-jessie
debootstrap
Bug reassigned from package 'base-files' to 'debootstrap'.
No longer marked as found in versions base-files/7
Processing control commands:
> retitle -1 base-files: fails to install with pre-jessie debootstrap
Bug #767999 [debootstrap] please upload for stable
Changed Bug title to 'base-files: fails to install with pre-jessie debootstrap'
from 'please upload for stable'
>
Control: retitle -1 base-files: fails to install with pre-jessie debootstrap
Control: reassign -1 base-files
Control: found -1 base-files/7.6
Control: tags -1 +patch
(TL;DR: there's a working patch attached)
On Tue, Nov 04, 2014 at 09:04:14AM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 04, 2014 at
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> retitle 767999 please upload for stable
Bug #767999 [debootstrap] base-files: fails to install with pre-jessie
debootstrap
Changed Bug title to 'please upload for stable' from 'base-files: fails to
install with pre-jessie deb
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> reassign 767999 debootstrap
Bug #767999 [base-files] base-files: fails to install with pre-jessie
debootstrap
Bug reassigned from package 'base-files' to 'debootstrap'.
No longer marked as found in versions base-files/7.
reassign 767999 debootstrap
thanks
People who do not understand the essential flag keep filing bugs
against base-files.
Kind debootstrap maintainers: I think it's about time that you make an
upload for stable fixing this. I've heard that the fix is already in
git, so apparently it's just a matter
reassign -1 debootstrap
thanks
On Tue, Nov 04, 2014 at 01:05:11AM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote:
> Package: base-files
> Version: 7.10
> Severity: grave
>
> W: Failure trying to run: chroot /tmp/unstable/. dpkg --force-depends
> --install /var/cache/apt/archives/base-files_7.10_i386.deb
> /var/cache
Package: base-files
Version: 7.10
Severity: grave
W: Failure trying to run: chroot /tmp/unstable/. dpkg --force-depends
--install /var/cache/apt/archives/base-files_7.10_i386.deb
/var/cache/apt/archives/base-passwd_3.5.36_i386.deb
While #766459 fixed debootstrapping with jessie's debootstrap, I'm
34 matches
Mail list logo
