> On Thu, Aug 25, 2022 at 06:13:12PM +0200, Lukas Märdian wrote: > > > Actually, there is a 4th option: > > > 4/ Static PPA build: > > We could fork Jammy's src:systemd package and adopt it to ONLY > build a "systemd-repart" binary package, possibly as a static build. > This should conflict with systemd >= 251 to notify users on upgrades > about the situation. Such PPA could be maintained by the ubuntu- > foundations team and would not require duplicated maintenance work. > It should be relatively easy to integrate this into mkosi's > "install_debian_or_ubuntu()" method [2], where apt repositories are > set-up and packages installed, anyways. > > Would this be a viable option as well? It would have the lowest > impact of all. > > Provided that the use of a ppa would work for upstream's CI > requirements, I > think this is the lowest-cost option and would prefer we do this. > > However, if that's not an option, I would accept the addition of a > systemd-repart binary package in jammy as an SRU.
It's not just for the CI, it's also about removing friction for users and developers who come to the project. And of course maintenance cost and so on. I have updated the MR to add a new systemd-repart package for the jammy/devel branch: https://code.launchpad.net/~bluca/ubuntu/+source/systemd/+git/systemd/+merge/427557 Thanks! -- Kind regards, Luca Boccassi
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
