Re: [systemd-devel] systemd-stable and Debian's systemd release strategy
On Wed, 18 Jan 2023 at 16:57:05 +0100, Michael Biebl wrote: > backports: mostly me lacking time Also, a note for those who might be less familiar with Debian: the backports policy is that Debian 11 backports (bullseye-backports) should always be in sync with the version that would be in Debian 12 (bookworm) if we released Debian 12 today, and similar for other pairs of Debian versions. We don't backport different upstream versions unless there are exceptional circumstances. If Debian 12 was released today, it would contain systemd 252.4-1, therefore when someone has time to update bullseye-backports, the only correct thing to update it with would be a backport of that version, as 252.4-1~bpo11+1 (or a backport of whatever newer version has gone into bookworm by then, if any). There will not be any more 251.x versions in Debian now that we have picked up 252.x. The only versions that get special treatment (and will either pick up releases from systemd-stable or backported bug fixes, depending what the maintainers are able to justify to the release managers) are the versions that were current at the time of each Debian stable release freeze, meaning 247.x for Debian 11, and most likely 252.x for Debian 12. smcv (not a Debian systemd maintainer, but I do maintain other packages that get updated in stable releases)
Re: [systemd-devel] systemd-stable and Debian's systemd release strategy
Michael, thank you for taking the time to explain, this is helpful and puts things into perspective! Appreciate the effort of all maintainers. Regards, tok On 18.01.23 16:57, Michael Biebl wrote: Quite simple: stable releases: Debian policy is rather strict regarding stable uploads and some of the changes that landed in systemd-stable are not really considered suitable for a stable upload to Debian. That's why we only cherry-pick select fixes. If the Debian policy was more lax in that regard, uploading system-stable releases would be an option (and initially I had planned to do that, but backed away seeing that the diff between 247.3 and 237.13 was rather large) backports: mostly me lacking time. I didn't get around to do a bpo upload of v252. One significant issue was the split of systemd-resolved into a separate package. We discussed that internally if it would be too disruptive for a bpo upload or not and whether this should be rolled back for a bpo upload, which would mean additional work. We mostly agreed after internal discussion to upload the changes as-is to bpo and I've been looking into this recently but ran into issues with autopkgtest failing for v252 which needs further investigation. Some of the issues I could fix, some might need more work. Am Mi., 18. Jan. 2023 um 10:52 Uhr schrieb tok : Apologies, was not subscribed previously but would also seek the input of systemd-devel on the matter below. Regards, tok On 18.01.23 10:05, tok wrote: Hi, This is not meant as blame but I sincerely would like to understand the mechanisms/approach and apparent complexities behind it: I was wondering if anyone could shed some light on Debian's strategy of releasing systemd packages? Commendably, the systemd project maintains a dedicated repository (systemd-stable) for stable branches with backported patches available to all distros, but apparently the Debian project is not leveraging this to its advantage: Current version in Debian stable: 247.3-7+deb11u1 (March 2022) Latest version of this major release in systemd-stable: 247.13 (Dec 2022, 10 minor versions ahead) Current version in Debian backports: 251.3-1~bpo11+1 (Aug 2022) Latest version of this major release in systemd-stable: 251.10 (Dec 2022, 7 minor versions ahead) What is the reason for this gap? I understand package maintaining is a challenging task, especially for something complex like systemd. But would the systemd-stable repo not provide already a lot of groundwork (as in: backporting bugfixes) for this, to reduce the effort? Thanks for insights, regards, tok
Re: [systemd-devel] systemd-stable and Debian's systemd release strategy
And as always: help is more then welcome. If you want to get involved, please contact us at #debian-systemd on OFTC Am Mi., 18. Jan. 2023 um 16:57 Uhr schrieb Michael Biebl : > > Quite simple: > stable releases: Debian policy is rather strict regarding stable > uploads and some of the changes that landed in systemd-stable are not > really considered suitable for a stable upload to Debian. That's why > we only cherry-pick select fixes. > If the Debian policy was more lax in that regard, uploading > system-stable releases would be an option (and initially I had planned > to do that, but backed away seeing that the diff between 247.3 and > 237.13 was rather large) > > backports: mostly me lacking time. I didn't get around to do a bpo > upload of v252. One significant issue was the split of > systemd-resolved into a separate package. We discussed that internally > if it would be too disruptive for a bpo upload or not and whether this > should be rolled back for a bpo upload, which would mean additional > work. > We mostly agreed after internal discussion to upload the changes as-is > to bpo and I've been looking into this recently but ran into issues > with autopkgtest failing for v252 which needs further investigation. > Some of the issues I could fix, some might need more work. > > Am Mi., 18. Jan. 2023 um 10:52 Uhr schrieb tok : > > > > Apologies, was not subscribed previously but would also seek the input > > of systemd-devel on the matter below. > > > > Regards, tok > > > > > > On 18.01.23 10:05, tok wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > This is not meant as blame but I sincerely would like to understand the > > > mechanisms/approach and apparent complexities behind it: I was wondering > > > if anyone could shed some light on Debian's strategy of releasing systemd > > > packages? > > > > > > Commendably, the systemd project maintains a dedicated repository > > > (systemd-stable) for stable branches with backported patches available to > > > all distros, but apparently the Debian project is not leveraging this to > > > its advantage: > > > > > > Current version in Debian stable: > > > 247.3-7+deb11u1 (March 2022) > > > Latest version of this major release in systemd-stable: > > > 247.13 (Dec 2022, 10 minor versions ahead) > > > > > > Current version in Debian backports: > > > 251.3-1~bpo11+1 (Aug 2022) > > > Latest version of this major release in systemd-stable: > > > 251.10 (Dec 2022, 7 minor versions ahead) > > > > > > > > > What is the reason for this gap? I understand package maintaining is a > > > challenging task, especially for something complex like systemd. But > > > would the systemd-stable repo not provide already a lot of groundwork (as > > > in: backporting bugfixes) for this, to reduce the effort? > > > > > > Thanks for insights, regards, > > > tok
Re: [systemd-devel] systemd-stable and Debian's systemd release strategy
Quite simple: stable releases: Debian policy is rather strict regarding stable uploads and some of the changes that landed in systemd-stable are not really considered suitable for a stable upload to Debian. That's why we only cherry-pick select fixes. If the Debian policy was more lax in that regard, uploading system-stable releases would be an option (and initially I had planned to do that, but backed away seeing that the diff between 247.3 and 237.13 was rather large) backports: mostly me lacking time. I didn't get around to do a bpo upload of v252. One significant issue was the split of systemd-resolved into a separate package. We discussed that internally if it would be too disruptive for a bpo upload or not and whether this should be rolled back for a bpo upload, which would mean additional work. We mostly agreed after internal discussion to upload the changes as-is to bpo and I've been looking into this recently but ran into issues with autopkgtest failing for v252 which needs further investigation. Some of the issues I could fix, some might need more work. Am Mi., 18. Jan. 2023 um 10:52 Uhr schrieb tok : > > Apologies, was not subscribed previously but would also seek the input > of systemd-devel on the matter below. > > Regards, tok > > > On 18.01.23 10:05, tok wrote: > > Hi, > > > > This is not meant as blame but I sincerely would like to understand the > > mechanisms/approach and apparent complexities behind it: I was wondering if > > anyone could shed some light on Debian's strategy of releasing systemd > > packages? > > > > Commendably, the systemd project maintains a dedicated repository > > (systemd-stable) for stable branches with backported patches available to > > all distros, but apparently the Debian project is not leveraging this to > > its advantage: > > > > Current version in Debian stable: > > 247.3-7+deb11u1 (March 2022) > > Latest version of this major release in systemd-stable: > > 247.13 (Dec 2022, 10 minor versions ahead) > > > > Current version in Debian backports: > > 251.3-1~bpo11+1 (Aug 2022) > > Latest version of this major release in systemd-stable: > > 251.10 (Dec 2022, 7 minor versions ahead) > > > > > > What is the reason for this gap? I understand package maintaining is a > > challenging task, especially for something complex like systemd. But would > > the systemd-stable repo not provide already a lot of groundwork (as in: > > backporting bugfixes) for this, to reduce the effort? > > > > Thanks for insights, regards, > > tok
[systemd-devel] systemd-stable and Debian's systemd release strategy
Apologies, was not subscribed previously but would also seek the input of systemd-devel on the matter below. Regards, tok On 18.01.23 10:05, tok wrote: Hi, This is not meant as blame but I sincerely would like to understand the mechanisms/approach and apparent complexities behind it: I was wondering if anyone could shed some light on Debian's strategy of releasing systemd packages? Commendably, the systemd project maintains a dedicated repository (systemd-stable) for stable branches with backported patches available to all distros, but apparently the Debian project is not leveraging this to its advantage: Current version in Debian stable: 247.3-7+deb11u1 (March 2022) Latest version of this major release in systemd-stable: 247.13 (Dec 2022, 10 minor versions ahead) Current version in Debian backports: 251.3-1~bpo11+1 (Aug 2022) Latest version of this major release in systemd-stable: 251.10 (Dec 2022, 7 minor versions ahead) What is the reason for this gap? I understand package maintaining is a challenging task, especially for something complex like systemd. But would the systemd-stable repo not provide already a lot of groundwork (as in: backporting bugfixes) for this, to reduce the effort? Thanks for insights, regards, tok
