| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Apt.installedBackport would do this:
apt-get install -t stretch-backports foo bar
Apt.backportInstalled does this:
apt-get install foo/stretch-backports bar/stretch-backports
The Apt.installedBackport behaviour can install the dependencies of foo and bar
from stretch-backports even when the versions in stretch will satisfy the
dependencies of the backports of foo and bar. So this property can result in
very many more backports being installed on the host when intended. But the
number of installed backports should always be minimised.
Worse, whether this happens is highly dependent on the system state, and the
order in which other properties get ensured. For example,
& Apt.installed ["dgit"]
& Apt.installedBackport ["dgit"]
will install only dgit from stretch-backports, but unless debhelper and
devscripts happen to already be installed,
& Apt.installedBackport ["dgit"]
& Apt.installed ["dgit"]
will install dgit, debhelper, devscripts and maybe more from backports. This is
surprising, difficult to debug, and breaks the expectation that when the order
in which properties are ensured is not specified with connectives like
`requires` and `before`, ensuring them in any order will produce the same
result.
Property renamed because user configs should not silently break, as they would
if they did not list dependencies that must be installed from stable-backports.
Signed-off-by: Sean Whitton <spwhitton@spwhitton.name>
|
|
No such backport exists in the archive.
Signed-off-by: Sean Whitton <spwhitton@spwhitton.name>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
version changes.
Surprised this didn't come up before, since propellor was run against
progressively old versions of libraries when propelling eg, a chroot.
It finally broke on an arm box, where libm got updated to a new version
and propellor used a symbol from the new version.
The comment says that propellor may be running from an existing shim
in which case it's reused. That could be a nested chroot or other
container, or perhaps propellor was deployed via a precompiled tarball
which is built using a shim. The code used to use "checkAlreadyShimmed shim"
which I don't see how it deals with either of those scenarios.
Changed to "checkAlreadyShimmed propellorbin", which I think will deal with
them, but I've not tested such scenarios.
Added code to delete old versions of libraries out of the shim directory
to avoid masses of old ones piling up over time. Property.Chroot sets up
the shim directory and then bind mounts it into the chroot. To avoid
deleting the source of a bind mount, made this only delete files in the
shim directory, but not the shim directory itself.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Useful when a build fails on a tmpfs (usually a package's test suite).
Signed-off-by: Sean Whitton <spwhitton@spwhitton.name>
|
|
|
|
|
