Bug#1033065: release-notes: i386 notes should specify minimum CPU requirements
On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 12:05:24PM +, James Addison wrote: > On Mon, 20 Mar 2023 13:31:37 +0800, pabs wrote: > > Perhaps lintian could add classification tags for the relevant CPU > > instructions and then the i386 port could have extra autopkgtest nodes > > that only process the packages detected by lintian. > > That's not a bad idea. Are there any reasons that that might _not_ be a good > idea before filing a wishlist bug? (performance, implications of scanning > binary packages, ...) This seems logistically problematic. Is lintian actually ran on i386 binaries anymore ? lintian.debian.org only lists reports for amd64 packages. I am not sure it is worth the trouble, frankly. I do not see what this would bring us. Cheers, -- Bill. Imagine a large red swirl here.
Bug#1033065: release-notes: i386 notes should specify minimum CPU requirements
Package: release-notes Followup-For: Bug #1033065 X-Debbugs-Cc: elb...@debian.org Control: severity -1 serious Increasing this bug's severity to a release-critical, based on mailing list discussion[1]. Paul: bug #1005863 has most of the relevant context for Debian, although I'd recommend the following wiki page as a more concise, purpose-written summary: https://www.jookia.org/wiki/Nopl [1] - https://lists.debian.org/debian-doc/2023/03/msg00012.html
Processed: Re: release-notes: i386 notes should specify minimum CPU requirements
Processing control commands: > severity -1 serious Bug #1033065 [release-notes] release-notes: i386 notes should specify minimum CPU requirements Severity set to 'serious' from 'important' -- 1033065: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1033065 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: Re: Processed: Re: release-notes: i386 notes should specify minimum CPU requirements
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > severity 1033065 normal Bug #1033065 [release-notes] release-notes: i386 notes should specify minimum CPU requirements Severity set to 'normal' from 'serious' > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 1033065: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1033065 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Bug#1033065: release-notes: i386 notes should specify minimum CPU requirements
On Mon, 2023-03-20 at 12:05 +, James Addison wrote: > That's not a bad idea. Are there any reasons that that might _not_ be a good > idea before filing a wishlist bug? (performance, implications of scanning > binary packages, ...) binutils isn't security supported, so using objdump in lintian probably isn't a good idea, especially since it is run on ftp-master.debian.org. In addition disassembling binaries is going to have an impact on the performance of lintian, especially for larger packages. -- bye, pabs https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Bug#1033065: release-notes: i386 notes should specify minimum CPU requirements
Package: release-notes Followup-For: Bug #1033065 X-Debbugs-Cc: p...@debian.org, ballo...@debian.org Dear Maintainer and Éric-Martin (with Bill on carbon copy), Please find linked below a previous release note from Debian 9.0 (stretch) that we could use to provide relevant user guidance: https://www.debian.org/releases/stretch/i386/release-notes/ch-information.html#i386-is-now-almost-i686 (I discovered this while reading a 2019 mailing list discussion[1]) On Mon, 20 Mar 2023 13:31:37 +0800, pabs wrote: > Broadly speaking, detecting non-baseline instruction usage isn't > possible without false positives, because the program could use runtime > instruction selection based on the current CPU to avoid currently > unavailable instructions, while the binary would still contain those > instructions for use on other CPUs. > > https://wiki.debian.org/InstructionSelection > > Of course you could do the scanning and then use autopkgtests or manual > tests to find out if the found programs work on the relevant CPUs. Thank you, that makes sense. I've run some ad-hoc script analysis[2] on a recent mirror of the bookworm i386 archive, and it appears that ~20% or so of packages are potentially affected in that (so, in all likelihood, Debian is currently uninstallable and/or unusable on Geode LX). In theory I would like to run a comparative analysis against the snapshot archives from previous points in time, but am not sure whether I'll get around to doing that. On Mon, 20 Mar 2023 13:31:37 +0800, pabs wrote: > Perhaps lintian could add classification tags for the relevant CPU > instructions and then the i386 port could have extra autopkgtest nodes > that only process the packages detected by lintian. That's not a bad idea. Are there any reasons that that might _not_ be a good idea before filing a wishlist bug? (performance, implications of scanning binary packages, ...) [1] - https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2019/04/msg01091.html [2] - https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1005863#48
