Bug#987266: preinst check for kernel release > 255 may no longer be needed
On 2022-03-04 10:22, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > On 04/03/2022 09:50, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > > On 2022-03-04 09:19, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > On Sun, 26 Sep 2021 09:57:02 +0200 Salvatore Bonaccorso > > > wrote: > > > > Hi Aurelien, > > > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 06:36:33PM +0200, Andras Korn wrote: > > > > > Package: libc6 > > > > > Version: 2.31-11 > > > > > Severity: normal > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > due to > > > > > https://salsa.debian.org/glibc-team/glibc/-/commit/6ddfa57577af0d96df9ddd7be401f5ce9a9bcc0f > > > > > (a commit from 2004) the preinst script for glibc checks whether the > > > > > "z" in the "x.y.z" of the kernel version is less than 255. If yes, > > > > > the package refuses to install. > > > > > > I hit this problem on a box with a custom 4.9.266 kernel. > > > > > > Based on this lkml thread: > > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/7pR0YCctzN9phpuEChlL7_SS6auHOM80bZBcGBTZPuMkc6XjKw7HUXf9vZUPi-IaV2gTtsRVXgywQbja8xpzjGRDGWJsVYSGQN5sNuX1yaQ=@protonmail.com/T/, > > > > > the check is no longer needed because the kernel caps the version > > > > > code it reports to 255, even if uname prints a higher number. > > > > > > Of course, you could conceivably still hit the problem with earlier > > > > > kernels, so I suppose the logic of the check should be modified, not > > > > > removed entirely, to be technically correct. > > > > > > If forced at gunpoint to make a guess, I would guess, though, that > > > > > removing the check would have very little actual impact; it also > > > > > doesn't protect the user from installing a kernel with an > > > > > unsupported version number after having installed glibc. > > > > > > > > Prompted by > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/stable/yvaholtsb0nk0...@kroah.com/T/#t and > > > > given this was addressed with > > > > https://salsa.debian.org/glibc-team/glibc/-/commit/b3c76cf1cd0c8b6e4844c6362a45143c136a2900 > > > > is this something we should do consider as well for the older releases > > > > where it is not acutally needed for people compiling their own custom > > > > kernels? > > > > > > Another stretch user brought this up [1]. I suppose there are and as time > > > passes (with current stable kernel versions getting higher) there will be > > > more users affected by this in buster and bullseye. Have you further > > > considered including this fix in a proposed-update? > > > > Yep I have submitted #1005906 for bullseye, and I have committed the fix > > to the buster branch, but not yet submitted the bug. > > I was wondering what docker had to do with all this, until I realized you > meant #1005949 :) Oops, sorry about that. > > Stretch is going to be more complicated as we still support 2.6.32 > > kernels, which means the third version level actually still makes sense. > > I'm surprised we support that. However in any case we wouldn't need to We disabled it at some point but we got strong pressure to re-enable it as it is the last version supported by OpenVZ. > backport [1], we could just backport [2] and support both 2.6.32 as well as > e.g. 4.14.264. Wouldn't that work? If we backport only [2], it means [1] doesn't work correctly as it assumes that the third version level is < 255, just like glibc internals. Aurelien > [1] > https://salsa.debian.org/glibc-team/glibc/-/commit/5452b62ded81132ebedf3db82577de5277479b27 > [2] > https://salsa.debian.org/glibc-team/glibc/-/commit/b3c76cf1cd0c8b6e4844c6362a45143c136a2900 -- Aurelien Jarno GPG: 4096R/1DDD8C9B aurel...@aurel32.net http://www.aurel32.net
Bug#987266: preinst check for kernel release > 255 may no longer be needed
On 04/03/2022 09:50, Aurelien Jarno wrote: On 2022-03-04 09:19, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: Hi, On Sun, 26 Sep 2021 09:57:02 +0200 Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote: Hi Aurelien, On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 06:36:33PM +0200, Andras Korn wrote: Package: libc6 Version: 2.31-11 Severity: normal Hi, due to https://salsa.debian.org/glibc-team/glibc/-/commit/6ddfa57577af0d96df9ddd7be401f5ce9a9bcc0f (a commit from 2004) the preinst script for glibc checks whether the "z" in the "x.y.z" of the kernel version is less than 255. If yes, the package refuses to install. I hit this problem on a box with a custom 4.9.266 kernel. Based on this lkml thread: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/7pR0YCctzN9phpuEChlL7_SS6auHOM80bZBcGBTZPuMkc6XjKw7HUXf9vZUPi-IaV2gTtsRVXgywQbja8xpzjGRDGWJsVYSGQN5sNuX1yaQ=@protonmail.com/T/, the check is no longer needed because the kernel caps the version code it reports to 255, even if uname prints a higher number. Of course, you could conceivably still hit the problem with earlier kernels, so I suppose the logic of the check should be modified, not removed entirely, to be technically correct. If forced at gunpoint to make a guess, I would guess, though, that removing the check would have very little actual impact; it also doesn't protect the user from installing a kernel with an unsupported version number after having installed glibc. Prompted by https://lore.kernel.org/stable/yvaholtsb0nk0...@kroah.com/T/#t and given this was addressed with https://salsa.debian.org/glibc-team/glibc/-/commit/b3c76cf1cd0c8b6e4844c6362a45143c136a2900 is this something we should do consider as well for the older releases where it is not acutally needed for people compiling their own custom kernels? Another stretch user brought this up [1]. I suppose there are and as time passes (with current stable kernel versions getting higher) there will be more users affected by this in buster and bullseye. Have you further considered including this fix in a proposed-update? Yep I have submitted #1005906 for bullseye, and I have committed the fix to the buster branch, but not yet submitted the bug. I was wondering what docker had to do with all this, until I realized you meant #1005949 :) Stretch is going to be more complicated as we still support 2.6.32 kernels, which means the third version level actually still makes sense. I'm surprised we support that. However in any case we wouldn't need to backport [1], we could just backport [2] and support both 2.6.32 as well as e.g. 4.14.264. Wouldn't that work? Cheers, Emilio [1] https://salsa.debian.org/glibc-team/glibc/-/commit/5452b62ded81132ebedf3db82577de5277479b27 [2] https://salsa.debian.org/glibc-team/glibc/-/commit/b3c76cf1cd0c8b6e4844c6362a45143c136a2900
Bug#987266: preinst check for kernel release > 255 may no longer be needed
On 2022-03-04 09:19, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > Hi, > > On Sun, 26 Sep 2021 09:57:02 +0200 Salvatore Bonaccorso > wrote: > > Hi Aurelien, > > > > On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 06:36:33PM +0200, Andras Korn wrote: > > > Package: libc6 > > > Version: 2.31-11 > > > Severity: normal > > > > Hi, > > > > due to > > > https://salsa.debian.org/glibc-team/glibc/-/commit/6ddfa57577af0d96df9ddd7be401f5ce9a9bcc0f > > > (a commit from 2004) the preinst script for glibc checks whether the > > > "z" in the "x.y.z" of the kernel version is less than 255. If yes, > > > the package refuses to install. > > > > I hit this problem on a box with a custom 4.9.266 kernel. > > > > Based on this lkml thread: > > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/7pR0YCctzN9phpuEChlL7_SS6auHOM80bZBcGBTZPuMkc6XjKw7HUXf9vZUPi-IaV2gTtsRVXgywQbja8xpzjGRDGWJsVYSGQN5sNuX1yaQ=@protonmail.com/T/, > > > the check is no longer needed because the kernel caps the version > > > code it reports to 255, even if uname prints a higher number. > > > > Of course, you could conceivably still hit the problem with earlier > > > kernels, so I suppose the logic of the check should be modified, not > > > removed entirely, to be technically correct. > > > > If forced at gunpoint to make a guess, I would guess, though, that > > > removing the check would have very little actual impact; it also > > > doesn't protect the user from installing a kernel with an > > > unsupported version number after having installed glibc. > > > > Prompted by > > https://lore.kernel.org/stable/yvaholtsb0nk0...@kroah.com/T/#t and > > given this was addressed with > > https://salsa.debian.org/glibc-team/glibc/-/commit/b3c76cf1cd0c8b6e4844c6362a45143c136a2900 > > is this something we should do consider as well for the older releases > > where it is not acutally needed for people compiling their own custom > > kernels? > > Another stretch user brought this up [1]. I suppose there are and as time > passes (with current stable kernel versions getting higher) there will be > more users affected by this in buster and bullseye. Have you further > considered including this fix in a proposed-update? Yep I have submitted #1005906 for bullseye, and I have committed the fix to the buster branch, but not yet submitted the bug. Stretch is going to be more complicated as we still support 2.6.32 kernels, which means the third version level actually still makes sense. -- Aurelien Jarno GPG: 4096R/1DDD8C9B aurel...@aurel32.net http://www.aurel32.net
Bug#987266: preinst check for kernel release > 255 may no longer be needed
Hi, On Sun, 26 Sep 2021 09:57:02 +0200 Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote: Hi Aurelien, On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 06:36:33PM +0200, Andras Korn wrote: > Package: libc6 > Version: 2.31-11 > Severity: normal > > Hi, > > due to > https://salsa.debian.org/glibc-team/glibc/-/commit/6ddfa57577af0d96df9ddd7be401f5ce9a9bcc0f > (a commit from 2004) the preinst script for glibc checks whether the > "z" in the "x.y.z" of the kernel version is less than 255. If yes, > the package refuses to install. > > I hit this problem on a box with a custom 4.9.266 kernel. > > Based on this lkml thread: > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/7pR0YCctzN9phpuEChlL7_SS6auHOM80bZBcGBTZPuMkc6XjKw7HUXf9vZUPi-IaV2gTtsRVXgywQbja8xpzjGRDGWJsVYSGQN5sNuX1yaQ=@protonmail.com/T/, > the check is no longer needed because the kernel caps the version > code it reports to 255, even if uname prints a higher number. > > Of course, you could conceivably still hit the problem with earlier > kernels, so I suppose the logic of the check should be modified, not > removed entirely, to be technically correct. > > If forced at gunpoint to make a guess, I would guess, though, that > removing the check would have very little actual impact; it also > doesn't protect the user from installing a kernel with an > unsupported version number after having installed glibc. Prompted by https://lore.kernel.org/stable/yvaholtsb0nk0...@kroah.com/T/#t and given this was addressed with https://salsa.debian.org/glibc-team/glibc/-/commit/b3c76cf1cd0c8b6e4844c6362a45143c136a2900 is this something we should do consider as well for the older releases where it is not acutally needed for people compiling their own custom kernels? Another stretch user brought this up [1]. I suppose there are and as time passes (with current stable kernel versions getting higher) there will be more users affected by this in buster and bullseye. Have you further considered including this fix in a proposed-update? Cheers, Emilio [1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts/2022/03/msg2.html
Bug#987266: preinst check for kernel release > 255 may no longer be needed
Hi Aurelien, On Sun, Sep 26, 2021 at 01:21:16PM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > Hi, > > On 2021-09-26 09:57, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote: > > Hi Aurelien, > > > > On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 06:36:33PM +0200, Andras Korn wrote: > > > Package: libc6 > > > Version: 2.31-11 > > > Severity: normal > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > due to > > > https://salsa.debian.org/glibc-team/glibc/-/commit/6ddfa57577af0d96df9ddd7be401f5ce9a9bcc0f > > > (a commit from 2004) the preinst script for glibc checks whether the > > > "z" in the "x.y.z" of the kernel version is less than 255. If yes, > > > the package refuses to install. > > > > > > I hit this problem on a box with a custom 4.9.266 kernel. > > > > > > Based on this lkml thread: > > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/7pR0YCctzN9phpuEChlL7_SS6auHOM80bZBcGBTZPuMkc6XjKw7HUXf9vZUPi-IaV2gTtsRVXgywQbja8xpzjGRDGWJsVYSGQN5sNuX1yaQ=@protonmail.com/T/, > > > the check is no longer needed because the kernel caps the version > > > code it reports to 255, even if uname prints a higher number. > > > > > > Of course, you could conceivably still hit the problem with earlier > > > kernels, so I suppose the logic of the check should be modified, not > > > removed entirely, to be technically correct. > > > > > > If forced at gunpoint to make a guess, I would guess, though, that > > > removing the check would have very little actual impact; it also > > > doesn't protect the user from installing a kernel with an > > > unsupported version number after having installed glibc. > > > > Prompted by > > https://lore.kernel.org/stable/yvaholtsb0nk0...@kroah.com/T/#t and > > given this was addressed with > > https://salsa.debian.org/glibc-team/glibc/-/commit/b3c76cf1cd0c8b6e4844c6362a45143c136a2900 > > is this something we should do consider as well for the older releases > > where it is not acutally needed for people compiling their own custom > > kernels? > > The bug has been reported with severity normal, and it seemed it was > limited to a rather small range of users. Now if you thing it is a more > widespread issue, feel free to raise the severity so that we can > consider it from buster and bullseye. The fix has been in testing/sid > for a few weeks, so this should be acceptable for older releases. > > At least for bullseye, we have an update scheduled, currently being > under review by the release team (bug #992693). But we won't be able to > fix Raspbian ;-). It is probalby not that widespread, because I guess the case where user install older custom kernel from 4.4.y and 4.9.y series on buster and newer is not that frequent and at time of writing the stable series supported are 4.4.285, 4.9.284, so the two problematic ones, 4.14.248, 4.19.208, 5.4.149, 5.10.69 and 5.14.8. But at some point upstream will reach 256 minor version as well forthe 4.14.y, 4.19.y and 5.10.y series. So maybe it is worth of fixing this as for bullseye and buster point releases (not the next ones). So no I have no strong opinion but I stumbled over the above on the stable list. Regards, Salvatore
Bug#987266: preinst check for kernel release > 255 may no longer be needed
Hi, On 2021-09-26 09:57, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote: > Hi Aurelien, > > On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 06:36:33PM +0200, Andras Korn wrote: > > Package: libc6 > > Version: 2.31-11 > > Severity: normal > > > > Hi, > > > > due to > > https://salsa.debian.org/glibc-team/glibc/-/commit/6ddfa57577af0d96df9ddd7be401f5ce9a9bcc0f > > (a commit from 2004) the preinst script for glibc checks whether the > > "z" in the "x.y.z" of the kernel version is less than 255. If yes, > > the package refuses to install. > > > > I hit this problem on a box with a custom 4.9.266 kernel. > > > > Based on this lkml thread: > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/7pR0YCctzN9phpuEChlL7_SS6auHOM80bZBcGBTZPuMkc6XjKw7HUXf9vZUPi-IaV2gTtsRVXgywQbja8xpzjGRDGWJsVYSGQN5sNuX1yaQ=@protonmail.com/T/, > > the check is no longer needed because the kernel caps the version > > code it reports to 255, even if uname prints a higher number. > > > > Of course, you could conceivably still hit the problem with earlier > > kernels, so I suppose the logic of the check should be modified, not > > removed entirely, to be technically correct. > > > > If forced at gunpoint to make a guess, I would guess, though, that > > removing the check would have very little actual impact; it also > > doesn't protect the user from installing a kernel with an > > unsupported version number after having installed glibc. > > Prompted by > https://lore.kernel.org/stable/yvaholtsb0nk0...@kroah.com/T/#t and > given this was addressed with > https://salsa.debian.org/glibc-team/glibc/-/commit/b3c76cf1cd0c8b6e4844c6362a45143c136a2900 > is this something we should do consider as well for the older releases > where it is not acutally needed for people compiling their own custom > kernels? The bug has been reported with severity normal, and it seemed it was limited to a rather small range of users. Now if you thing it is a more widespread issue, feel free to raise the severity so that we can consider it from buster and bullseye. The fix has been in testing/sid for a few weeks, so this should be acceptable for older releases. At least for bullseye, we have an update scheduled, currently being under review by the release team (bug #992693). But we won't be able to fix Raspbian ;-). -- Aurelien Jarno GPG: 4096R/1DDD8C9B aurel...@aurel32.net http://www.aurel32.net
Bug#987266: preinst check for kernel release > 255 may no longer be needed
Hi Aurelien, On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 06:36:33PM +0200, Andras Korn wrote: > Package: libc6 > Version: 2.31-11 > Severity: normal > > Hi, > > due to > https://salsa.debian.org/glibc-team/glibc/-/commit/6ddfa57577af0d96df9ddd7be401f5ce9a9bcc0f > (a commit from 2004) the preinst script for glibc checks whether the > "z" in the "x.y.z" of the kernel version is less than 255. If yes, > the package refuses to install. > > I hit this problem on a box with a custom 4.9.266 kernel. > > Based on this lkml thread: > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/7pR0YCctzN9phpuEChlL7_SS6auHOM80bZBcGBTZPuMkc6XjKw7HUXf9vZUPi-IaV2gTtsRVXgywQbja8xpzjGRDGWJsVYSGQN5sNuX1yaQ=@protonmail.com/T/, > the check is no longer needed because the kernel caps the version > code it reports to 255, even if uname prints a higher number. > > Of course, you could conceivably still hit the problem with earlier > kernels, so I suppose the logic of the check should be modified, not > removed entirely, to be technically correct. > > If forced at gunpoint to make a guess, I would guess, though, that > removing the check would have very little actual impact; it also > doesn't protect the user from installing a kernel with an > unsupported version number after having installed glibc. Prompted by https://lore.kernel.org/stable/yvaholtsb0nk0...@kroah.com/T/#t and given this was addressed with https://salsa.debian.org/glibc-team/glibc/-/commit/b3c76cf1cd0c8b6e4844c6362a45143c136a2900 is this something we should do consider as well for the older releases where it is not acutally needed for people compiling their own custom kernels? Regards, Salvatore
Bug#987266: preinst check for kernel release > 255 may no longer be needed
Package: libc6 Version: 2.31-11 Severity: normal Hi, due to https://salsa.debian.org/glibc-team/glibc/-/commit/6ddfa57577af0d96df9ddd7be401f5ce9a9bcc0f (a commit from 2004) the preinst script for glibc checks whether the "z" in the "x.y.z" of the kernel version is less than 255. If yes, the package refuses to install. I hit this problem on a box with a custom 4.9.266 kernel. Based on this lkml thread: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/7pR0YCctzN9phpuEChlL7_SS6auHOM80bZBcGBTZPuMkc6XjKw7HUXf9vZUPi-IaV2gTtsRVXgywQbja8xpzjGRDGWJsVYSGQN5sNuX1yaQ=@protonmail.com/T/, the check is no longer needed because the kernel caps the version code it reports to 255, even if uname prints a higher number. Of course, you could conceivably still hit the problem with earlier kernels, so I suppose the logic of the check should be modified, not removed entirely, to be technically correct. If forced at gunpoint to make a guess, I would guess, though, that removing the check would have very little actual impact; it also doesn't protect the user from installing a kernel with an unsupported version number after having installed glibc. Best regards, András -- A ham sandwich is better than nothing. Nothing is better than eternal happiness. So a ham sandwich is better than eternal happiness.
