Bug#1021821: systemd: FTBFS with stage1 profile
Am 16.10.22 um 19:25 schrieb Niels Thykier: On Sat, 15 Oct 2022 14:28:12 +0200 Michael Biebl wrote: Given that dh-exec is basically unmaintained, I'm a bit reluctant to switch to it. The dh-exec package has a maintainer again. (I think this was mentioned on IRC as well - repeating here for completeness) Could you raise this with Niels/debhelper: I do think we need better support for build profiles in dh_install. Personally, I think dh-exec does a great job at providing filters (among other features) to debhelper configuration files and I am not currently not considering to absorbing them into debhelper itself. If Niels is happy with dh-exec, then I'm ok with it as well. Regards, Michael OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Bug#1021821: systemd: FTBFS with stage1 profile
> > > What happens to break is missing files in dh_install. Clearly, > the > > > intention was not to include cryptsetup plugins in stage1 and I > agree > > > with that. Unfortunately, dh_install itself does not allow > > > conditionalizing lines in .install files. I'm attaching a patch > that > > > uses dh-exec to achieve this and hope you like it. If not, maybe > we can > > > install the plugins from debian rules manually? > > > > Given that dh-exec is basically unmaintained, I'm a bit reluctant > to switch > > to it. > > I've gone the easier route of proposing a different patch. It may not > be > as pretty, but it works today and looks reasonably maintainable to > me. Given Niels confirmed dh-exec is now maintained, I'd prefer using it rather than doing things manually in d/rules. -- Kind regards, Luca Boccassi signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Bug#1021821: systemd: FTBFS with stage1 profile
Hi Michael, On Sat, Oct 15, 2022 at 02:28:12PM +0200, Michael Biebl wrote: > > the addition of cryptsetup plugins broke the stage1 build. Do you think > > it would be possible to add a native stage1 build pass to salsa-ci such > > that you'd notice earlier? Of course you'd only get the failure then, > > not the patch. ;) In your other mail, you asked about how to do this. I looked into salsa-ci and no, there is no easy way to just do this. It completely ignores build profiles. I think this will have to be fixed at salsa-ci level even just for noticing nocheck ftbfs that will become RC after bookworm. Deferred. > > What happens to break is missing files in dh_install. Clearly, the > > intention was not to include cryptsetup plugins in stage1 and I agree > > with that. Unfortunately, dh_install itself does not allow > > conditionalizing lines in .install files. I'm attaching a patch that > > uses dh-exec to achieve this and hope you like it. If not, maybe we can > > install the plugins from debian rules manually? > > Given that dh-exec is basically unmaintained, I'm a bit reluctant to switch > to it. I've gone the easier route of proposing a different patch. It may not be as pretty, but it works today and looks reasonably maintainable to me. Helmut diff --minimal -Nru systemd-251.6/debian/changelog systemd-251.6/debian/changelog --- systemd-251.6/debian/changelog 2022-10-14 16:34:00.0 +0200 +++ systemd-251.6/debian/changelog 2022-10-17 08:45:37.0 +0200 @@ -1,3 +1,11 @@ +systemd (251.6-1.1) UNRELEASED; urgency=medium + + * Non-maintainer upload. + * Conditionalize installation of cryptsetup plugins in stage1. (Closes: +#1021821) + + -- Helmut Grohne Mon, 17 Oct 2022 08:45:37 +0200 + systemd (251.6-1) unstable; urgency=medium * New upstream version 251.6 diff --minimal -Nru systemd-251.6/debian/rules systemd-251.6/debian/rules --- systemd-251.6/debian/rules 2022-10-14 16:34:00.0 +0200 +++ systemd-251.6/debian/rules 2022-10-17 08:45:37.0 +0200 @@ -217,6 +217,7 @@ # files shipped by cryptsetup ifeq (, $(filter stage1, $(DEB_BUILD_PROFILES))) rm -f debian/tmp/usr/share/man/man5/crypttab.5 + dh_install -psystemd debian/tmp/usr/lib/$(DEB_HOST_MULTIARCH)/cryptsetup usr/lib/$(DEB_HOST_MULTIARCH) endif # files shipped by systemd diff --minimal -Nru systemd-251.6/debian/systemd.install systemd-251.6/debian/systemd.install --- systemd-251.6/debian/systemd.install2022-10-14 16:34:00.0 +0200 +++ systemd-251.6/debian/systemd.install2022-10-17 08:45:32.0 +0200 @@ -17,7 +17,6 @@ usr/lib/systemd/ usr/lib/tmpfiles.d/ usr/lib/kernel -usr/lib/*/cryptsetup/ usr/share/bash-completion/ usr/share/zsh/vendor-completions/ usr/share/dbus-1/
Bug#1021821: systemd: FTBFS with stage1 profile
On Sat, 15 Oct 2022 14:28:12 +0200 Michael Biebl wrote: Am 15.10.22 um 14:01 schrieb Helmut Grohne: > Source: systemd > Version: 251.6-1 > Severity: important > Justification: breaks architecture bootstrap > Tags: ftbfs patch > User: helm...@debian.org > Usertags: rebootstrap > > Hi, > > the addition of cryptsetup plugins broke the stage1 build. Do you think > it would be possible to add a native stage1 build pass to salsa-ci such > that you'd notice earlier? Of course you'd only get the failure then, > not the patch. ;) > > What happens to break is missing files in dh_install. Clearly, the > intention was not to include cryptsetup plugins in stage1 and I agree > with that. Unfortunately, dh_install itself does not allow > conditionalizing lines in .install files. I'm attaching a patch that > uses dh-exec to achieve this and hope you like it. If not, maybe we can > install the plugins from debian rules manually? Given that dh-exec is basically unmaintained, I'm a bit reluctant to switch to it. The dh-exec package has a maintainer again. (I think this was mentioned on IRC as well - repeating here for completeness) Could you raise this with Niels/debhelper: I do think we need better support for build profiles in dh_install. Personally, I think dh-exec does a great job at providing filters (among other features) to debhelper configuration files and I am not currently not considering to absorbing them into debhelper itself. Thanks, ~Niels
Bug#1021821: systemd: FTBFS with stage1 profile
Am 15.10.22 um 14:01 schrieb Helmut Grohne: the addition of cryptsetup plugins broke the stage1 build. Do you think it would be possible to add a native stage1 build pass to salsa-ci such that you'd notice earlier? Good idea, how can we do that? OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#1021821: systemd: FTBFS with stage1 profile
Am 15.10.22 um 14:01 schrieb Helmut Grohne: Source: systemd Version: 251.6-1 Severity: important Justification: breaks architecture bootstrap Tags: ftbfs patch User: helm...@debian.org Usertags: rebootstrap Hi, the addition of cryptsetup plugins broke the stage1 build. Do you think it would be possible to add a native stage1 build pass to salsa-ci such that you'd notice earlier? Of course you'd only get the failure then, not the patch. ;) What happens to break is missing files in dh_install. Clearly, the intention was not to include cryptsetup plugins in stage1 and I agree with that. Unfortunately, dh_install itself does not allow conditionalizing lines in .install files. I'm attaching a patch that uses dh-exec to achieve this and hope you like it. If not, maybe we can install the plugins from debian rules manually? Given that dh-exec is basically unmaintained, I'm a bit reluctant to switch to it. Could you raise this with Niels/debhelper: I do think we need better support for build profiles in dh_install. OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#1021821: systemd: FTBFS with stage1 profile
Source: systemd Version: 251.6-1 Severity: important Justification: breaks architecture bootstrap Tags: ftbfs patch User: helm...@debian.org Usertags: rebootstrap Hi, the addition of cryptsetup plugins broke the stage1 build. Do you think it would be possible to add a native stage1 build pass to salsa-ci such that you'd notice earlier? Of course you'd only get the failure then, not the patch. ;) What happens to break is missing files in dh_install. Clearly, the intention was not to include cryptsetup plugins in stage1 and I agree with that. Unfortunately, dh_install itself does not allow conditionalizing lines in .install files. I'm attaching a patch that uses dh-exec to achieve this and hope you like it. If not, maybe we can install the plugins from debian rules manually? Helmut diff --minimal -Nru systemd-251.6/debian/changelog systemd-251.6/debian/changelog --- systemd-251.6/debian/changelog 2022-10-14 16:34:00.0 +0200 +++ systemd-251.6/debian/changelog 2022-10-15 07:32:34.0 +0200 @@ -1,3 +1,11 @@ +systemd (251.6-1.1) UNRELEASED; urgency=medium + + * Non-maintainer upload. + * Conditionalize installation of cryptsetup plugins in stage1 using +dh-exec. (Closes: #-1) + + -- Helmut Grohne Sat, 15 Oct 2022 07:32:34 +0200 + systemd (251.6-1) unstable; urgency=medium * New upstream version 251.6 diff --minimal -Nru systemd-251.6/debian/control systemd-251.6/debian/control --- systemd-251.6/debian/control2022-10-14 16:34:00.0 +0200 +++ systemd-251.6/debian/control2022-10-15 07:31:23.0 +0200 @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@ Vcs-Browser: https://salsa.debian.org/systemd-team/systemd Homepage: https://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd Build-Depends: debhelper-compat (= 13), + dh-exec, dh-sequence-installnss, dh-sequence-package-notes, pkg-config, diff --minimal -Nru systemd-251.6/debian/systemd.install systemd-251.6/debian/systemd.install --- systemd-251.6/debian/systemd.install2022-10-14 16:34:00.0 +0200 +++ systemd-251.6/debian/systemd.install2022-10-15 07:32:23.0 +0200 @@ -1,3 +1,4 @@ +#!/usr/bin/dh-exec etc/ bin/ lib/modprobe.d/ @@ -17,7 +18,7 @@ usr/lib/systemd/ usr/lib/tmpfiles.d/ usr/lib/kernel -usr/lib/*/cryptsetup/ + usr/lib/*/cryptsetup/ usr/share/bash-completion/ usr/share/zsh/vendor-completions/ usr/share/dbus-1/