On Fri, Jul 26, 2024 at 12:33 PM Nick Rosbrook <nick.rosbr...@canonical.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 26, 2024 at 12:20 PM Robie Basak <robie.ba...@ubuntu.com> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jul 26, 2024 at 12:11:05PM -0400, Nick Rosbrook wrote: > > > In short, this is not systemd's bug. > > > > I don't think that matters. The idea of the autopkgtest infrastructure > > and "always being green" is that we hold back packaging updates if it > > would regress behaviour, even if it's the "fault" of a different > > package. > > > > It follows that we should revert if an update slips past our CI > > infrastructure such that the behaviour regresses. > > > > Otherwise, new unfortunate interactions between packages cause everybody > > else's development to grind to a halt. > > > > There is a trade-off here of course, in terms of minimising cost. It may > > be appropriate to "push ahead" after a regression occurs, or indeed > > deliberately bypass CI to land regression behaviour, if that is on > > balance going to maximise progress from that point. > > > > But if such a trade-off to be made, I think it needs justification. Our > > default position should be to minimise regression and "always be green". > > > > That's all fair. > > In this particular case, the LXD team is already working hard on > fixing it there, so I think reverting systemd at this point would be > more trouble than it's worth. I will sync with them, and if it seems > like it will be a while before their fixes land for users, I will > upload a workaround to override the problematic unit settings for all > services.
I have just checked with the LXD team, and this has already been fixed in latest/edge for LXD. I confirmed the fix myself just now. -Nick -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
