Hi, Christian Seiler <christ...@iwakd.de> (2016-08-13): > (Cc'ing util-linux and selinux maintainers.) > > On 08/13/2016 07:08 PM, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > > partman-iscsi and open-iscsi-udeb are no longer installable since the > > latter now depends on libmount1-udeb, which was dropped in 2014 (see > > https://bugs.debian.org/723168). > [ summary of #723168: libmount1-udeb was dropped because it > had no rdep at that time, and it now depended on libselinux, > which didn't have an udeb at the time and still doesn't ] > > Yikes. I'm terribly sorry I didn't catch that. :-(
No worries, we've had udeb installability checks for a while, and they're here for a reason. :) > Note that libmount1-udeb is not explicitly listed as a > dependency, but added via substvars automatically. And since > libmount-dev needs to explicitly have the udeb in its shlibs, > once I saw the automatic dependency in the udeb, I assumed > that libmount1-udeb would just exist. (I think the udeb: > line in the shlibs file of libmount is still there, even > though the udeb was removed.) I filed the bug report right away to avoid forgetting about it but yeah, the following in libmount1 is somewhat misleading (second line): | libmount 1 libmount1 (>= 2.28~) | udeb: libmount 1 libmount1-udeb (>= 2.28~) > The question is: what's the best fix for that? > > - libmount is now a hard dependency of open-iscsi. It's not > critical functionality (it's a new safety feature to not > log out of sessions that still have mounted file systems, > which is not that important in a d-i environment), and I > could easily patch it out. OTOH, I seriously doubt > upstream will want to make libmount optional. (Especially > since it's from util-linux, which is really a base > package.) > > - OTOH, this affects more than just one package > > As a short term fix I could build open-iscsi twice, once > with and once without the libmount dependency. But I really > don't want to carry a Debian-specific patch that removes > libmount forever, so the proper solution would be to > coordinate with util-linux and selinux to have both of them > (selinux first) provide udebs for the libraries. (I doubt > that util-linux maintainers want to build util-linux twice > either.) > > So I'd probably want to do the following: > > Step 1: build open-iscsi twice, once with libmount patched > out (closing this bug) > Step 2: file bugs against util-linux and libselinux to > have them build udebs (I can provide patches) > Step 3: make open-iscsi-udeb depend on libmount1-udeb again > > Is that agreeable? I can't comment on the libmount/libselinux bits, but looking at it from a debian-boot@ point of view, that looks rather sane, thanks. KiBi.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
