| Unit193 | LeePen: There's a lot of noise in http://paste.openstack.org/show/R0Sup8WDxVRNRAzgYyFn, but B-D, S-V, Section, Priority, whitespace, and d/copyright would be noteworthy. d/watch was only adjusted to simplify and match unreleased versions. | 00:00 |
|---|---|---|
| bgstack15 | LeePen: is the installer-iso tool going to use beowulf-proposed-updates by default? | 00:11 |
| bgstack15 | Or will it use it only if the system that builds it has that enabled? | 00:11 |
| rrq | bgstack15: TLDR; if the build host has that source point, the iso is likely to become "version confused" about those packages | 00:39 |
| bgstack15 | I thought we were building a new iso, to get the proposed-updates category. | 00:40 |
| rrq | its first stage that sets up its meta database about packages will ignore that source list point | 00:40 |
| rrq | its second stage that pulls the packages will pull using that spurce point | 00:40 |
| rrq | I'd agree on the objecive :) | 00:41 |
| rrq | t | 00:41 |
| rrq | probably will need pacthing of pool/Makefile to be aware of that source point | 00:42 |
| bgstack15 | And I hate to quibble, but ensuring I know the vocabulary precisely: please tell me that you want my build host to include the binaries repository: | 00:42 |
| bgstack15 | deb http://deb.devuan.org/merged beowulf-proposed-updates main contrib non-free | 00:42 |
| bgstack15 | in the build host's sources.list | 00:42 |
| rrq | yeah I don't think anyone has put their mind to this question; and you sound stressed :) | 00:47 |
| bgstack15 | Ah, you may relax. I'm not stressed. Mildly frustrated, but not stressed. | 00:47 |
| bgstack15 | I intend to do the right thing, without too many failed attempts. | 00:47 |
| rrq | if it's to be a "proper" 3.1 iso, then it should not include a "side" codename beowulf-proposed-updates, but only the codename "beowulf" | 00:48 |
| bgstack15 | interesting to note, that my brief perusal of the pool/Makefile leads me to believe that the presence of the list files in /var/lib/apt/lists/ will mean they will be parsed. | 00:48 |
| bgstack15 | Of course, those files will appear if at any point apt-get update is run when an apt repo is enabled. If it is subsequently disabled, those files will still exist and become stale. | 00:49 |
| rrq | its limited by CODENAME and SECTIONS | 00:49 |
| bgstack15 | OK, so it sounds like I should disable beowulf-proposed-updates (and clean apt's lists cache of it) on the build host. | 00:49 |
| bgstack15 | This sounds however, like it will defeat LeePen's comment above about how tomcat9 is now in beowulf-proposed-updates. | 00:49 |
| rrq | yes | 00:50 |
| rrq | there is that special patch to add beowulf-security to the iso; maybe this expands to a second one to also include beowulf-proposed-updates | 00:52 |
| bgstack15 | And let's make me look even dumber for the irc logs! When I've run this before, I never saw a prompt about signing the ISO file. Will I sign the iso artifacts after their generation? | 00:52 |
| bgstack15 | Forgive me; I'm new to actually participating in real distro work! | 00:52 |
| golinux | You are the next generation, grasshopper. :D | 00:53 |
| golinux | ( you might not get that reference) | 00:54 |
| rrq | the signing of the published iso is a manual chore | 00:54 |
| rrq | I have had all sorts of learning experiences to get that done | 00:56 |
| rrq | so the technical issue is to work around the small-mindedness of the original packager to allow the packages of the additional codename to be included; either by pretending them to be in "main" (as is done for -security) or by allowing the isoe to carry an additional codename | 00:59 |
| rrq | isoe = iso | 00:59 |
| golinux | (Apologies for the OT) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbNCBVzPYak | 01:00 |
| rrq | the second approcahe which on the surface seems more proper will however find resistance in the acutal installation procedure, which currently, like debootstrap, assumes and relies on a single codename (beowulf) | 01:02 |
| rrq | (that was why beowulf-security/main is patched in as if being in "beowulf/main") | 01:04 |
| rrq | so it probably comes back to a patch of pool/Makefile to bring in the beowulf-proposed-updates/main packages as if being beowulf/main in its meta database, and then pull those packages onto the iso | 01:06 |
| rrq | I think it would as simple as to replicate the SECURITY patch in that Makefile | 01:07 |
| rrq | and include the sources.list point on the build host | 01:07 |
| rrq | lines 28,29 | 01:07 |
| bgstack15 | So I just dist-upgraded with the beowulf-proposed-updates, and now I have disabled that repo. But now I've got the ~9 packages, and apparently installer-iso wants to use the currently-installed list to help populate its list. | 01:15 |
| bgstack15 | I am having trouble getting apt-get --allow-downgrades dist-upgrade to actually downgrade the ~9 packages... | 01:15 |
| bgstack15 | And yes, I am familiar with the grasshopper reference. I saw that movie once. | 01:16 |
| golinux | Didn't know it was a movie. It was a TV series in the 70s | 01:17 |
| rrq | biab | 01:18 |
| bgstack15 | Oh, I actually thought it was from The Karate Kid. | 01:19 |
| golinux | https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0068093/ | 01:19 |
| golinux | Bullseye going into freeze soonish. Posted by HoaS on FDN: http://forums.debian.net/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=148049 | 01:24 |
| rrq | right: the iso should have the ~9 packagaes... the "problem" is to get those into the "meta database" during build so they get entered into the ISO's beowulf/meta Packages file | 02:05 |
| rrq | so use pool/Makefile:28 to define a PROPUP variable similar to SECURITY and then add that similarly o line 29 | 02:06 |
| rrq | (which I suppose becomes line 30) | 02:07 |
| rrq | and then all magic will happen with just an ordinary incantation | 02:08 |
| HumanG33k | debian motion package drop sysvint script in testing (i make a mail to ask to continue ship the script ) | 20:36 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.17.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at https://mg.pov.lt/irclog2html/!