Re: linux-headers-5.15.0-1028-gke for Ubuntu 22.04

2023-05-12 Thread Dimitri John Ledkov 
Please see this discussion over here
https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/kernel-team/2023-May/139336.html and
the emails before/later in the thread.

tl;dr Note you have access to headers on the host that you can bind
mount in the container, you are using obsolete out-of-date kernel ABI.
You can use `pull-pkg / pull-lp-debs / pull-lp-ddebs` as needed to
fetch desired packages for Jammy ABI directly from launchpad.

On Sat, 13 May 2023 at 00:51, Elad Gabay  wrote:
>
> Hello,
> Is there a reason that "linux-headers-5.15.0-1028-gke" published only for 
> Ubuntu 20.04 but not for 22.04?
> https://packages.ubuntu.com/uk/focal/main/linux-headers-5.15.0-1028-gke
> Ubuntu – Details of package linux-headers-5.15.0-1028-gke in focal
> Linux kernel headers for version 5.15.0 on 64 bit x86 SMP
> packages.ubuntu.com
>
>
> Thanks
> Elad
> --
> Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
> Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss



-- 
okurrr,

Dimitri

-- 
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

linux-headers-5.15.0-1028-gke for Ubuntu 22.04

2023-05-12 Thread Elad Gabay 
Hello,
Is there a reason that "linux-headers-5.15.0-1028-gke" published only for 
Ubuntu 20.04 but not for 22.04?
https://packages.ubuntu.com/uk/focal/main/linux-headers-5.15.0-1028-gke
Ubuntu – Details of package linux-headers-5.15.0-1028-gke in 
focal
Linux kernel headers for version 5.15.0 on 64 bit x86 SMP
packages.ubuntu.com


Thanks
Elad
-- 
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

Update python3-blinker

2023-05-12 Thread Jay Sridharan 
The latest version of Flask now requires blinker >= 1.6.2, but the apt repo 
python3-blinker is still on 1.4. Given that blinker 1.4 is almost 8 years old 
now, I think perhaps the python3-blinker package can be updated?

Let me know your thoughts.

Thank you!
Jay
-- 
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

Re: NBS removals of old kernels from stable -security and -updates pockets

2023-05-12 Thread Louis Bouchard 

Hello,
Le 12/05/2023 à 17:24, Dimitri John Ledkov a écrit :

On Fri, 12 May 2023 at 16:19, Steve Langasek  wrote:


On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 02:20:39PM +0200, Juerg Haefliger wrote:

I am therefore intending that, for jammy and later releases, we start to
prune NBS kernel packages on an ongoing basis, not just at EOL time.



We already have users complaining on IRC about missing kernel packages...


What, specifically, are the complaints?


What is the official way/process for getting older packages for example for
crash dump analysis where one might need an older kernel+dbgsym from an
active series?


Does the Ubuntu Kernel Team accept crash reports on out-of-date kernels?


Yes, often. Especially when a given ABI is "popular" (aka default
quick launch in clouds, point release download media, certified, and
similar).
Also Canonical Support & Livepatch mostly work with out-of-date reports too.
As generally the desire is for the kernel they are going to reboot
into, fix a specific problem, rather than rebooting to the newest one
to still discover that the issue at hand is not fixed.



Being one of the customers that brought up the issue on IRC, maybe I can
comment a bit more.

First of all, this situation breaks the possibility of installing an 
older kernel, or to systematically install the same kernel version on 
multiple platforms (aka pinning a kernel version), etc.


While this is not the place to discuss the usefulness of kernel version 
pinning, this was the case on thousands of our servers and it is no 
longer the possible. And using Launchpad's publishihnghistory' endpoint 
is not the simplest task to automate when the previous "apt-get -y 
install linux-image-generic-{version}" was trivial. For instance in 
order to d/l from launchpad we need to know the complete version number 
with the added -{number}{number} suffix of the .deb package which is not 
the case with "apt-get".


I have yet to investigate the case but it also makes it difficult, when 
using HWE meta-packages to restrict installation of kernels to a 
specific major version (i.e. keep installing 5.19.x when newer HWE 
kernels with major versions are available)




The general policy for apport is to disallow bug report submissions if the
executable or any of the loaded libraries are from out-of-date packages.

But it will still be possible to download these older packages from
Launchpad: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+publishinghistory


As mentioned elsewhere pull-pkg (and friends pull-lp-debs /
pull-lp-ddebs ) are very useful tools to quickly & securely download
desired packages from launchpad librarian.



You will have guessed that Canonical support is not the only one to 
perform crash dump analysis. H/W specific issues never make it to the 
distro and many people are not versed in developer's specific toolset. 
So the possibility to rely on the distribution standard mechanisms, 
especially when those have been possible for years is easier for the 
majority.


All that to say that, while the presence of those packages was 
historically motivated by their necessity for netboot, it has become 
expected and relied upon in many workflows.


Kind regards,

...Louis (aka caribou)

--
ubuntu-devel mailing list
ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel

Re: NBS removals of old kernels from stable -security and -updates pockets

2023-05-12 Thread Dimitri John Ledkov 
On Fri, 12 May 2023 at 16:19, Steve Langasek  wrote:
>
> On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 02:20:39PM +0200, Juerg Haefliger wrote:
> > > I am therefore intending that, for jammy and later releases, we start to
> > > prune NBS kernel packages on an ongoing basis, not just at EOL time.
>
> > We already have users complaining on IRC about missing kernel packages...
>
> What, specifically, are the complaints?
>
> > What is the official way/process for getting older packages for example for
> > crash dump analysis where one might need an older kernel+dbgsym from an
> > active series?
>
> Does the Ubuntu Kernel Team accept crash reports on out-of-date kernels?

Yes, often. Especially when a given ABI is "popular" (aka default
quick launch in clouds, point release download media, certified, and
similar).
Also Canonical Support & Livepatch mostly work with out-of-date reports too.
As generally the desire is for the kernel they are going to reboot
into, fix a specific problem, rather than rebooting to the newest one
to still discover that the issue at hand is not fixed.

> The general policy for apport is to disallow bug report submissions if the
> executable or any of the loaded libraries are from out-of-date packages.
>
> But it will still be possible to download these older packages from
> Launchpad: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+publishinghistory

As mentioned elsewhere pull-pkg (and friends pull-lp-debs /
pull-lp-ddebs ) are very useful tools to quickly & securely download
desired packages from launchpad librarian.

-- 
okurrr,

Dimitri

-- 
ubuntu-devel mailing list
ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel

Re: NBS removals of old kernels from stable -security and -updates pockets

2023-05-12 Thread Steve Langasek 
On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 02:20:39PM +0200, Juerg Haefliger wrote:
> > I am therefore intending that, for jammy and later releases, we start to
> > prune NBS kernel packages on an ongoing basis, not just at EOL time.

> We already have users complaining on IRC about missing kernel packages...

What, specifically, are the complaints?

> What is the official way/process for getting older packages for example for
> crash dump analysis where one might need an older kernel+dbgsym from an
> active series?

Does the Ubuntu Kernel Team accept crash reports on out-of-date kernels? 
The general policy for apport is to disallow bug report submissions if the
executable or any of the loaded libraries are from out-of-date packages.

But it will still be possible to download these older packages from
Launchpad: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+publishinghistory

-- 
Steve Langasek   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer   to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer   https://www.debian.org/
slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- 
ubuntu-devel mailing list
ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel

+1 maintenance report

2023-05-12 Thread Heinrich Schuchardt 

*aespipe*

The build failure on arm64, ppc64el, s390x can be avoided by disabling 
LTO with DEB_BUILD_MAINT_OPTIONS=optimize=-lto. LP #2019319 needs 
sponsering.



*postfix*

The installation of prerequisite postfix fails during autopkgtests of 
packages like fwlogwatch.


Postfix post installation routine checks that the concatenation of 
hostname and domain does not end with a dot. RFC 1034 defines that fully 
qualified domains end with a dot. So the postfix scripts seems to be 
wrong. LP #2019195 tracks the issue which is worked on by the 
foundations team.



*umockdev*

Autopkgtests fail when trying to delete a missing file.

My patch was merged to upstream:
e3a0383ebd15 ("test: Allow missing .X11-unix/X5 file")

umockdev - 0.17.17-1ubuntu1 (LP #2019122) fixed the issue.


*stress-ng*

Autopkgtest fails on armhf with stack overflow in pthread test. Upstream 
has a bug report for it 
https://github.com/ColinIanKing/stress-ng/issues/283 and a patch 
637662d92865 ("stress-pthread: use 64 bit tid_addr to fix stack 
clobbering on 32 bit platforms").


But other problems on armhf remain.

LP #2019079


*ghdl*

The failure on arm64 was not reproducible in a schroot on an 
arm64-mantic system. As the error occured only for the biggest test file 
added the package to big_packages This fixed the arm64 and ppc64el 
autopkgtests.


The binary packages for architectures armhf, riscv64, s390x do not 
build. At least for armhf, s390x this is intentional according to the 
Debian changelog. So I had the package deleted on these architectures 
(LP #2019091).



*freebayes*

Autopkgtests fail. I identified the addresses in the crash call stack:

0x4c2ae, /usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu/bits/stdio2.h#79, fprintf , 
__fprintf_chk is meant to through SIGSEGV for stack overflows


0x128f2, src/freebayes.cpp#673, output to ostream of AlleleParser in main()

The observed crashes during autopkgtests are not reproducible locally, 
so I couldn't find a solution for LP #2019219.



*r-cran-dtplyr*

Adding an upstream patch fixes autopkgtests. LP 2018713 is in status 
"fix committed".



*securefs*

The autopkgtest failed due to a missing environment variable when 
testing. Fixed with LP #2018707.



*pywebdav*

A Debian patch causes an autopkgtest failure. My merge request 
https://salsa.debian.org/tryton-team/pywebdav/-/merge_requests/2 was 
accepted.


To fix a build warning when executing tests I created an upstream pull 
request https://github.com/andrewleech/PyWebDAV3/pull/36 which still 
needs review.


The new upstream version of pywebdav still does not pass all tests. I 
created an upstream issue 
https://github.com/andrewleech/PyWebDAV3/issues/37.


LP #2018702


Best regards

Heinrich

--
ubuntu-devel mailing list
ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel

Re: NBS removals of old kernels from stable -security and -updates pockets

2023-05-12 Thread Juerg Haefliger 
On Tue, 25 Apr 2023 11:05:39 +0200
Steve Langasek  wrote:

> Hi folks,
> 
> Kernel updates have an interesting property that, unlike most SRUs, the
> binary package names change for each update, because the ABI is presumed to
> change each time.
> 
> The result of this is that each kernel update causes the binary packages
> from the previous version to become "NBS" (not built from source).
> 
> Cleanup of NBS packages from the archive is a manual process involving
> Archive Admins; they are not automatically removed from the archive.  And
> historically, we did not want to remove NBS kernel packages during a release
> cycle, because our netboot images relied on modules of matching ABI being
> available in the archive corresponding to the kernel ABI used in the netboot
> image - and as we did not control when our users deployed netboot images on
> their infrastructure, we did not want to arbitrarily break working customer
> systems, we did not remove NBS kernel packages as we went - only at EOL of a
> release.
> 
> However, netboot images that rely on kernel packages of a matching ABI being
> available in the archive are an artifact of debian-installer, and as of
> jammy, we no longer ship debian-installer.  Therefore, this rationale for
> retaining the old kernel binary packages in the archive no longer exists.
> 
> Nearly 50% of all binary packages published in the jammy-updates pocket
> today are from kernels[1], and this proportion only increases as an LTS
> ages.  I have not done the analysis, but I expect the kernel packages to
> represent a similar or higher proportion of the *size* of the -updates
> pocket.  Thus, keeping these old binary packages around impacts both the
> speed of `apt update` for both -updates and -security pockets, and the size
> of the mirror set for these releases.
> 
> I am therefore intending that, for jammy and later releases, we start to
> prune NBS kernel packages on an ongoing basis, not just at EOL time.
> 

We already have users complaining on IRC about missing kernel packages...
What is the official way/process for getting older packages for example for
crash dump analysis where one might need an older kernel+dbgsym from an
active series?

...Juerg


pgpuF5LI9T2Iu.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- 
ubuntu-devel mailing list
ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel