Control: tags -1 + moreinfo

Excuse me chiming in late. I only noticed this now as dumat flagged the
upload to -p-u.

On Sat, Nov 02, 2024 at 08:01:24PM +0800, Shengqi Chen wrote:
> Package: release.debian.org
> Severity: normal
> Tags: bookworm
> User: release.debian....@packages.debian.org
> Usertags: pu
> X-Debbugs-Cc: kexec-to...@packages.debian.org, a...@debian.org, 
> shankerwangm...@gmail.com
> Control: affects -1 + src:kexec-tools
> 
> [ Reason ]
> 
> The stable-pu 1:2.0.25-3+deb12u1 (#1077668) assumes a merged /usr.

No. systemd has been searching both /lib/systemd/system and
/usr/lib/systemd/system even before bookworm. What did not search
/usr/lib/systemd/system was dh_installsystemd before trixie, so units
installed there would miss out on maintainer scripts restarting the
unit. In this case, you are masking a unit and as a result, you do not
intend to start it.  Indeed, the deb12u1 and deb12u2 have equal
maintainer scripts. So the behaviour difference of dh_installsystemd
does not affect kexec-tools.

> [ Impact ]
> 
> Users w/o merged /usr would not get the correct fix.

As detailed above, this is wrong.

> [ Risks ]
> 
> Minimal to none.

Moving files between / and /usr is prohibited by the file move
moratorium effective in Debian bookworm and considered to be a
release-critical bug due to an earlier CTTE ruling. A detailed analysis
of significant risks is outlined at
https://subdivi.de/~helmut/dep17.html.

> diff -Nru kexec-tools-2.0.25/debian/changelog 
> kexec-tools-2.0.25/debian/changelog
> --- kexec-tools-2.0.25/debian/changelog       2024-07-31 23:31:41.000000000 
> +0800
> +++ kexec-tools-2.0.25/debian/changelog       2024-11-02 19:55:08.000000000 
> +0800
> @@ -1,3 +1,11 @@
> +kexec-tools (1:2.0.25-3+deb12u2) bookworm; urgency=medium
> +
> +  * Non-maintainer upload.
> +  * Fix path for systemd units (bookworm uses /lib).

With my "I manage the /usr-move transition" hat on, I NACK the change.
The ultimate acceptance or rejection of the upload remains at the
discretion of the release managers.

Helmut

Reply via email to