Re: Old Bitcoin Core packages in old Ubuntu releases
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/bitcoin/+bug/1314616 On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 4:42 AM, Scott Ritchie wrote: > The package should be doable by any Ubuntu Developer since it is just > an empty package. Process will be your biggest hurdle, as you've > already seen. Do you have a Launchpad bug filed already? A title > like "Replace bitcoin-core with an empty dummy package" should suffice > -- that bug will then be linked in the SRU upload (uploading to > precise-proposed can be done by any dev). After that's done, the SRU > team can be subscribed who will then accept the upload. > > On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 6:57 AM, Micha Bailey > wrote: > > Hi, I brought up the issue of Bitcoin Core (the new name/branding of the > > Bitcoin reference implementation, to distinguish between the specific > > software and the system) and Ubuntu a few months ago. I was told that > while > > it could be (and then it was) removed from the then-next release, Trusty, > > and blacklisted from Debian syncing, it couldn't be removed from the > repos. > > Someone (I seem to remember it being S(teve?) Langasek) mentioned that > one > > possibility was an SRU (I think that was the term for it) that removed > the > > software by "replacing" it with a dummy package. Recently, yet another > user > > came in to the IRC channels and was having problems with version 0.3.24 > as > > shipped in precise. At the time I tried figuring out how to go about > > proposing the dummy package replacement, and was unsuccessful. So, I'm > > asking here: if anyone has the knowledge/skill for it and is willing to > help > > out with the process of "removing" the package? > > -- > > Ubuntu-motu mailing list > > Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com > > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu > > > -- Ubuntu-motu mailing list Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
Old Bitcoin Core packages in old Ubuntu releases
Hi, I brought up the issue of Bitcoin Core (the new name/branding of the Bitcoin reference implementation, to distinguish between the specific software and the system) and Ubuntu a few months ago. I was told that while it could be (and then it was) removed from the then-next release, Trusty, and blacklisted from Debian syncing, it couldn't be removed from the repos. Someone (I seem to remember it being S(teve?) Langasek) mentioned that one possibility was an SRU (I think that was the term for it) that removed the software by "replacing" it with a dummy package. Recently, yet another user came in to the IRC channels and was having problems with version 0.3.24 as shipped in precise. At the time I tried figuring out how to go about proposing the dummy package replacement, and was unsuccessful. So, I'm asking here: if anyone has the knowledge/skill for it and is willing to help out with the process of "removing" the package? -- Ubuntu-motu mailing list Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
Re: Bitcoin and Ubuntu
You may want to do the same with Litecoin. On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 8:44 AM, Steve Langasek wrote: > Hi Micha, > > On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 12:00:18AM +0200, Micha Bailey wrote: > > For these reasons and others, including the Bitcoin software in any > > stable, no-updates release is not a good thing for Ubuntu users nor for > > the bitcoin network as a whole. There is already a PPA, maintained by > > Matt Corallo, one of the core developers, and linked to from > > http://bitcoin.org/en/download. Said PPA provides both the Bitcoin > > software and the BDB 4.8 packages needed for wallet compatibility with > the > > software on other platforms. Over at Debian, their Bitcoin Packaging > Team > > has been maintaining the package, keeping it in the unstable branch (sid) > > only, where it is allowed to be updated with new releases of the > software. > > It is not included in the stable repository (wheezy), nor in testing > > (jessie). If I understand correctly, Ubuntu doesn't have that kind of > > release. It is my opinion that, given Ubuntu's methods of managing its > > software, it would be better to not include Bitcoin in the Ubuntu > > repositories, unless exceptions to the policies could be made, allowing > > all supported Ubuntu versions to get the latest updates as they come down > > from upstream. As a first step, the Bitcoin software should be removed > > from Trusty's repositories, assuming no exception can be made. Ideally, > > it would also be removed from the older repositories (Precise, Quantal, > > Raring, Saucy) if it can't be updated, though I'm told that's > > significantly harder from the perspective of the standard workflows. > > Since this package is in unstable only, I agree that it should not be > included in Ubuntu. I've removed the package from trusty now and > blacklisted it so that future versions are not synced from Debian > (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/bitcoin/+bug/1260602). > > Unfortunately, it is not feasible to remove the package from stable > releases. If there are versions of the package in stable releases that are > actively harmful, we could accept an SRU that disables the problematic > parts > on upgrade (with a suitable notice). > > -- > 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 Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ > slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org > -- Ubuntu-motu mailing list Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
Bitcoin and Ubuntu
Apologies for the cross-post, but I wasn't sure which mailing list would be most appropriate. Also, please note that I am writing this as myself, not as a representative of the Bitcoin project or development community. The Bitcoin software (the codebase maintained at https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin, also known as the Satoshi client, including bitcoind, the daemon version of the software, and Bitcoin-Qt, the GUI version of the software) is currently available in Ubuntu's software sources, specifically the Universe branch, as far back as Precise (bitcoind) and Raring (Bitcoin-Qt). There are several problems with the way Bitcoin is being distributed by Ubuntu. In this message, I'd like to mention a few of these, and try and find a way to solve the issues. Bitcoin is not a mature piece of software. It is still in beta, and new versions become available periodically. These new releases vary in nature, from adding new features to fixing bugs, some of which are critical. Bugs that are fixed can be anything from DoS bugs that can allow an attacker to cause nodes to become unresponsive or even crash, to minor graphical glitches in the Bitcoin-Qt GUI, to bugs that can inadvertently cause consensus failures, leading to a fork in the blockchain, such as the March 2013 fork. Some changes may be changes in criteria for transaction relay, such as allowing new transaction types or adjustments to the default fee policy. As I understand it, the way Ubuntu works is that when a new version of Ubuntu comes out, every 6 months, it's considered frozen, and packages that are in the repositories for that version aren't kept up to date. This is a problem for Bitcoin, given its status as a distributed consensus system that relies on the fact that nodes follow the same rules. Debian's version 0.8.3-2 of the package made the switch to using LevelDB included in the upstream code, rather than using the system LevelDB. This is explained in the debian/README.source file. Note, however, that Ubuntu releases prior to Saucy (Raring and older) haven't had this fix applied, which could potentially result in an unpredictable consensus split, as mentioned above. Additionally, there are other issues with the packaging process. Bitcoin, as of version 0.8.0, switched the blockchain indices from using Berkeley DB to using LevelDB. However, BDB is still used in the bitcoin wallet. All upstream release binaries are built using BDB version 4.8. The only version of Ubuntu which includes this version of BDB in its repositories is Lucid. Later versions build their Bitcoin packages with BDB 5.1. The problem with this is that BDB databases are not backwards-compatible with older versions of BDB. Any bitcoin wallet that is touched (created, or even once opened) by a Bitcoin binary built with a version later than 4.8 will become impossible to open with any Bitcoin binary built with an earlier version, which as mentioned includes the vast majority of Bitcoin binaries used on other platforms. This means that the wallet is not portable between platforms as is expected, and the error message is not one that clearly indicates the problem, as the failure originates in BDB and not the Bitcoin software. For these reasons and others, including the Bitcoin software in any stable, no-updates release is not a good thing for Ubuntu users nor for the bitcoin network as a whole. There is already a PPA, maintained by Matt Corallo, one of the core developers, and linked to from http://bitcoin.org/en/download. Said PPA provides both the Bitcoin software and the BDB 4.8 packages needed for wallet compatibility with the software on other platforms. Over at Debian, their Bitcoin Packaging Team has been maintaining the package, keeping it in the unstable branch (sid) only, where it is allowed to be updated with new releases of the software. It is not included in the stable repository (wheezy), nor in testing (jessie). If I understand correctly, Ubuntu doesn't have that kind of release. It is my opinion that, given Ubuntu's methods of managing its software, it would be better to not include Bitcoin in the Ubuntu repositories, unless exceptions to the policies could be made, allowing all supported Ubuntu versions to get the latest updates as they come down from upstream. As a first step, the Bitcoin software should be removed from Trusty's repositories, assuming no exception can be made. Ideally, it would also be removed from the older repositories (Precise, Quantal, Raring, Saucy) if it can't be updated, though I'm told that's significantly harder from the perspective of the standard workflows. -- Ubuntu-motu mailing list Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu