Because, this is a production build of package. LXC_DEVEL is about type of
build not about version.
For any package builds we should have LXC_DEVEL=0. The only case when
LXC_DEVEL=1 is when you are doing local development of the LXC and building it
for your self, or you building a package to ins
Public bug reported:
We can see autopkgtest failures on Noble:
https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/lxc
1:5.0.3-2ubuntu2 from noble-proposed/universe
Details from log
(https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/results/autopkgtest-noble/noble/amd64/l/lxc/20240327_203000_ce7d4@/log.gz):
==
** Patch added: "debdiff.diff"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lxc/+bug/2059550/+attachment/5763115/+files/debdiff.diff
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to lxc in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bu
It's worth mentioning that this debdiff includes not only tests
disabling but also fix that allows to build source package on Ubuntu.
If you do:
pull-lp-source liblxc-dev noble-proposed
cd lxc-5.0.3
debuild -S -d
you will see something like this:
dpkg-source -b .
dpkg-source: info: using sourc
Thanks, Julian!
Once this version pass all tests and reach archives I'll prepare PRs for
https://salsa.debian.org/lxc-team/lxc to be in sync with Debian.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to lxc in Ubuntu.
https://
Ok, lxc/1:5.0.3-2ubuntu4 was uploaded and it's getting better but,
unfortunately, "lxc-test-unpriv" test wasn't skipped really.
Despite this bug
(https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/autopkgtest/+bug/2056461) I
was able to make my local autopkgtest environment to work:
autopkgtest \
--apt-
** Patch added: "debdiff.diff"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lxc/+bug/2059550/+attachment/5763468/+files/debdiff.diff
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to lxc in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bu
Hi!
I would suggest to way 1-2 days, because right now we are trying to get
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lxc/1:5.0.3-2ubuntu5 in Noble. This
should solve this problem too.
I can only guess that your problem connected with that 1:5.0.1-0ubuntu8
was early replaced by 1:5.0.3-2ubuntu1, but t
https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/l/lxc
all tests are green, except i386 (which is broken for years :-( and this
should not block a migration).
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to lxc in Ubuntu.
https://bugs
Hi!
Couldn't you check if this is fixed for you?
This is what I see now on Noble:
root@lxc-test-noble:~# apt search liblxc
Sorting... Done
Full Text Search... Done
golang-gopkg-lxc-go-lxc.v2-dev/noble 0.0+git20230621.be98af2-1 all
Go bindings for liblxc
liblxc-common/noble,now 1:5.0.3-2ubuntu
https://github.com/canonical/lxd/pull/13820
** Changed in: lxd (Ubuntu)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Aleksandr Mikhalitsyn (mihalicyn)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to systemd in Ubuntu.
ht
see also
https://github.com/canonical/lxd/issues/13810
** Changed in: lxd (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed => Fix Committed
** Bug watch added: github.com/canonical/lxd/issues #13810
https://github.com/canonical/lxd/issues/13810
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member
>Ill need to check with mihalicyn if the fix relies on a thr lxd snap
switching base to core24.
no, but we need https://github.com/canonical/lxd-pkg-snap/pull/477
Full details:
https://github.com/canonical/lxd/issues/13810#issuecomment-2253259452
--
You received this bug notification because yo
** Also affects: apparmor (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apparmor in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2077413
Title:
apparmor unconfined profile b
Hey Christian!
thanks a lot for your fast reaction on this report!
>In other words: this looks like normal and expected behaviour to me.
You'll need to add a rule
ok, that makes sense.
>Note that abstractions/base allows signal (receive) peer=unconfined, -
and "unconfined" does not match your p
AFAIK, fix was landed
https://gitlab.com/apparmor/apparmor/-/commit/4bb134e4bb950a8c9a1f70a27eb2acd2a35df412
But changelog
https://changelogs.ubuntu.com/changelogs/pool/main/a/apparmor/apparmor_4.0.1really4.0.0-beta3-0ubuntu0.1/changelog
says that everything was reverted back to 4.0.0~beta.
--
Y
We have another problem which disappears when I revert
dc757a645cfa82f6ac252365df20a36a9ff82760 ("UBUNTU: SAUCE: apparmor4.0.0
[81/90]: apparmor: convert easy uses of unconfined() to
label_mediates()") commit.
Now it is not connected with unconfined profiles at all, it involves Ubuntu
Noble (host
Public bug reported:
Dear colleagues,
As I can see from:
-
https://git.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lxc/tree/configure?h=applied/ubuntu/jammy
-
https://git.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lxc/tree/configure?h=applied/ubuntu/kinetic
LXC 5.0.0 was built with LXC_DEVEL=1 set. But for release build w
We have discussed that in the #lxd-dev IRC with Simon but I decided to
post it here for others.
It looks like we need to patch 3 places:
https://git.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lxc/tree/configure.ac?h=applied/ubuntu/jammy#n3
https://git.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lxc/tree/configure?h=applied/ub
Simon wanted to make a debdiff for this issue because he has an
experience with that.
This is debdiff from me but this is the 1st debdiff in my life. Most
likely I did something wrong :-)
What I did:
1. set email and name
$ export DEBEMAIL="y...@email.com"
$ export DEBFULLNAME="Your Name"
2. p
** Patch removed: "set LXC_DEVEL to 0"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lxc/+bug/2039873/+attachment/5711815/+files/debdiff.diff
** Patch added: "set LXC_DEVEL to 0"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lxc/+bug/2039873/+attachment/5711843/+files/debdiff.diff
--
You receive
I have updated a debdiff and removed the boilerplate comment in
`0002-Ubuntu-set-LXC_DEVEL-to-0.patch as suggested by Simon Déziel
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to lxc in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/
I have just added SRU template
** Description changed:
- Dear colleagues,
-
- As I can see from:
- -
https://git.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lxc/tree/configure?h=applied/ubuntu/jammy
- -
https://git.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lxc/tree/configure?h=applied/ubuntu/kinetic
+ [ Impact ]
LXC
Dear Robie,
thanks for paying attention to this bug!
>Has this been fixed in the development release, and if so, how?
LXC_DEVEL is 1 in the development release:
https://github.com/lxc/lxc/blob/main/meson.build#L36
But LXC_DEVEL is 0 in *any* stable tag:
https://github.com/lxc/lxc/blob/lxc-5.0.3
>I meant the *Ubuntu* development release, not an upstream development
>release.
Ugh. If applied/ubuntu/devel is the right branch to check it then it is
not fixed in the Ubuntu development release too.
See:
https://git.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lxc/tree/meson.build?h=applied/ubuntu/devel#n33
Sure, I will do that.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to lxc in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2039873
Title:
liblxc-dev was built with LXC_DEVEL=1 in Ubuntu Jammy/Kinetic
Status in lxc package in Ubu
Ok, I'm attaching a debdiff for Noble.
Changelog:
Import LXC 5.0.3
- imported LXC 5.0.3 original sources
- dropped all debian/patches which are present in the LXC 5.0.3 already
- added autopkgtest to ensure that LXC_DEVEL is always 0
- aligned package names with the Debian
The ubuntu-sponsors team has been subscribed to the bug
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to lxc in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2039873
Title:
liblxc-dev was built with LXC_DEVEL=1 in Ubuntu 22.04 and
Hello, Dave!
Huge thanks for your attention to this bug!
>The major thing that I think needs correction is that this patch is
built on top of ubuntu/noble-devel by importing the upstream 5.0.3, but
what Stéphane suggested in comment 14 was to take the Debian upstream
(currently 5.0.3-2) and build
Ok, I have tried to do that but get stuck and have a few questions about
the process.
>In this case, the commits in the repo would be based on debian/sid
rather than ubuntu/noble-devel. This >would ensure we incorporate the
changes Debian has placed on top of lxc, as well as our own (and means
in
Dear colleagues,
I have taken a look on this ubuntu-import/rebase thing, thanks a lot for
your suggestions and advice.
Unfortunately, I can't see any possibility to follow this Ubuntu-import
way. Because the last Debian-based version of the LXC package was in
2012 (!) [
https://git.launchpad.net/
Alternatively, I can just pull a new upstream LXC sources and we keep
the Ubuntu-specific package as it is without switching to a Debian base
if it's so complex procedure. WDYT?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to
debdiff for mantic/noble (they have the same version 1:5.0.1-0ubuntu7
currently)
+lxc (1:5.0.1-0ubuntu8) mantic; urgency=medium
+
+ * Fix the LXC_DEVEL value to be 0
+- d/p/0003-meson-Set-DEVEL-flag-post-release.patch was dropped
+ as it should not be in the production builds
+ * Added
debdiff for Jammy
PPA:
https://launchpad.net/~mihalicyn/+archive/ubuntu/lxc-test-ppa-for-jammy
** Patch added: "debdiff for jammy"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lxc/+bug/2039873/+attachment/5740492/+files/debdiff_for_jammy.diff
--
You received this bug notification because you a
Updated debdiff for Mantic/Noble (added Launchpad bug reference)
PPA:
https://launchpad.net/~mihalicyn/+archive/ubuntu/lxc-test-ppa-for-mantic-and-noble
** Patch added: "debdiff for mantic/noble (they have the same version
1:5.0.1-0ubuntu7)"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lxc/+bug
>What are your thoughts on (a) and (b)?
>being marked as superficial won't block a migration if it fails (IIRC:
at least, it's definitely not a hard error). And we do want this to
"stop the line" if it fails, right?
Ideally, it's better to block upload of package if this fails, yes.
Because it's
Thanks, Dave!
Your branch and changes are looking good to me.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to lxc in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2039873
Title:
liblxc-dev was built with LXC_DEVEL=1 in Ubuntu 22
Huge thanks, Dave!
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to lxc in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2039873
Title:
[SRU] liblxc-dev was built with LXC_DEVEL=1 in Ubuntu 22.04 and later
releases
Status in lx
Hi Lukas,
yes, we know about that problem and yes, it's our priority to fix that.
We've combined our forces with AppArmor team to fix the issue on the AppArmor
side:
https://gitlab.com/apparmor/apparmor/-/merge_requests/333
This is waiting to be merged:
https://github.com/lxc/lxc/pull/4295
We
Hi Georgia,
thanks a lot for looking into this issue!
Kind regards,
Alex
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to apparmor in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2067900
Title:
apparmor unconfined profile block
40 matches
Mail list logo
