| arraybolt3 | cjwatson or whomever else works on debconf - Did you or anyone else happen to recently add conffile conflict handling to debconf? I remember seeing an old Debian bug report that asked for it to be added, but it seemed to have stalled. Asking because I just noticed a debconf prompt asking me to resolve a conffile conflict and thought it was neat that this was possible for at least the grub-pc | 02:23 |
|---|---|---|
| arraybolt3 | package, but also wondered if there was any way to turn this off since it's happening in Lubuntu 24.04 and Lubuntu's updater has built-in conffile conflict handling that is quite a bit more efficient and prettier at least in our environment. | 02:23 |
| arraybolt3 | *a debconf-kde prompt to be specific | 02:23 |
| sarnold | there's something like three different tools here: ucf, dpkg conffiles, maintainer script magic, and I think a fourth method of doing as little as possible | 02:39 |
| cjwatson | arraybolt3: nothing in this area has changed in debconf for quite some time. I guess you must have encountered ucf | 10:05 |
| kpcyrd | hello! I'm new to this, I've uploaded a bugfix for a package to debian unstable and it made it into noble-proposed/universe. what would be the next steps to request/propose moving the update from noble-proposed -> noble? thanks in advance! | 10:45 |
| juliank | kpcyrd: you wait until it happens | 10:50 |
| juliank | kpcyrd: or you solve whatever the issues are | 10:50 |
| kpcyrd | juliank: where can I lookup the issues? | 10:50 |
| juliank | kpcyrd: so go to the britney output at https://ubuntu-archive-team.ubuntu.com/proposed-migration/update_excuses.html and see what it's blocked on | 10:50 |
| juliank | kpcyrd: note that with the t64 transition lots of stuff is blocked on that | 10:51 |
| juliank | kpcyrd: hint: it's best to search for 'packagename (' such that you find the section for your package | 10:51 |
| kpcyrd | ok, so it seems if I want to make sure the bugfix is going to make it I'd try to avoid the dependency to nettle | 10:52 |
| juliank | kpcyrd: for more questions I probably am going to need the package name | 10:52 |
| kpcyrd | ah yes sorry: repro-env | 10:52 |
| juliank | if that's the only issue, I do think it's fine the nettle will migrate eventually and all will be well | 10:53 |
| kpcyrd | ok awesome, thank you! | 10:53 |
| juliank | you're welcome | 10:54 |
| adrien | in the update_excuses.html page, you can also append that to the url: #your-package, like #openssl or #xz-utils | 11:00 |
| === rkratky__ is now known as rkratky | ||
| mkukri | i cant build bpfcc against llvm-18 https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/llvm-toolchain-18/+bug/2056466 | 16:52 |
| -ubottu:#ubuntu-devel- Launchpad bug 2056466 in llvm-toolchain-18 (Ubuntu) "bpfcc fails to build against llvm-18-dev" [Undecided, New] | 16:52 | |
| mkukri | is there suppossed to be a libLLVM.so.18.1? | 16:54 |
| ginggs | LocutusOfBorg: ^ | 17:21 |
| LocutusOfBorg | mkukri, ginggs this is already fixed in Debian git | 18:53 |
| LocutusOfBorg | and sid | 18:53 |
| LocutusOfBorg | but until we finish the build, I don't think doko will sync :) | 18:53 |
| doko | already building llvm-18 in a ppa | 18:55 |
| tsimonq2 | mwhudson, juliank, vorlon: Hello, I bring gifts: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/germinate/+bug/2056483 | 19:50 |
| -ubottu:#ubuntu-devel- Launchpad bug 2056483 in germinate (Ubuntu) "Provides and NBS" [Undecided, New] | 19:50 | |
| tsimonq2 | I'm happy to write the code, would just like advice on the approach, if that makes sense. | 19:51 |
| vorlon | tsimonq2: I don't think you're going to have success trying to fix this in germinate. It is not universally correct to prefer a virtual package over a real one. The bug here is that seed traversal hit a dependency on libefivar1 first, marked it for inclusion; then hit a dependency on libefivar1t64, and couldn't resolve the conflict | 19:53 |
| tsimonq2 | vorlon: I'm not advocating for a universal solution to prefer virtual packages, I'm advocating for Germinate to become smarter based on how apt's dependency resolution works. | 20:00 |
| tsimonq2 | The piece that still puzzles me is, should livecd-rootfs's apt configuration be a hair more permissive? Or is this something that *can* be done in germinate? | 20:01 |
| tsimonq2 | Alternatively... germinate *could* just exclude NBS packages entirely | 20:03 |
| tsimonq2 | https://code.launchpad.net/~tsimonq2/germinate/+git/germinate/+merge/462006 :) | 21:19 |
| vorlon | tsimonq2: ok, I see your implementation specifically seeks to identify nbs packages, which is better than trying to interpret things via Provides:. I will defer to juliank on this; there are still certainly trade-offs here where refusing to install an NBS package can break a build | 21:51 |
| tsimonq2 | thanks :) | 22:18 |
| * tsimonq2 is curious to hear those tradeoffs | 22:18 | |
| mwhudson | tsimonq2: there is a wider point here which is that we do conceptually bunk in livecd-rootfs | 23:43 |
| mwhudson | +something | 23:43 |
| mwhudson | tsimonq2: germinate is an apt simulator, to some extend. so we take a list of packages from the seed and simulate which packages would be installed if you install all of them | 23:43 |
| mwhudson | then we take that list that germinate made, and ask apt to install all of *them* in the chroot | 23:44 |
| mwhudson | i don't know why we do this! we could just feed in the top level packages from the seed | 23:44 |
| mwhudson | which would at least give apt the chance to avoid issues like this | 23:45 |
| mwhudson | ugh typos galore but you get the idea | 23:45 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!