Re: Bug#1031622: d-i regression in weekly builds: FEATURE_C12 unsupported by the installed e2fsck

Simon McVittie <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.linux.debian.devel.cd
Message-ID <Y/[email protected]>
On Fri, 24 Feb 2023 at 16:56:23 +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Cyril Brulebois <[email protected]> (2023-02-19):
> > Simon McVittie <[email protected]> (2023-02-19):
> > > Are d-i alphas and weekly builds built differently? Is it perhaps the
> > > case that alphas are built from testing udebs, while weeklies are built
> > > from unstable udebs?

In conclusion: yes, that guess was correct.

> Tentative fix in:
>   https://salsa.debian.org/webmaster-team/webwml/-/commit/a22870164df5007ae4f4e356dfe54983be0f1e9e

Thanks for fixing that!

If I understand the situation correctly, that means the regression here is
indeed caused by the mke2fs in e2fsprogs/unstable defaulting to creating
a filesystem that cannot be fsck'd by the e2fsck in e2fsprogs/testing,
because orphan_file is a "compat" feature which can be ignored without
error by older kernels and other filesystem consumers like grub, but
due to the nature of a fsck tool, e2fsck is unwilling to tolerate "compat"
features that it doesn't understand?

(This is orthogonal to the handling of "incompat" features as discussed
(at some length) in #1030939.)

If that's the case, then I think because of the way our d-i/debian-cd
daily and weekly builds are done, filesystem maintainers need to make
sure that their filesystem-creation tools don't enable a new feature
by default until that feature is (at least minimally) supported by the
corresponding fsck tool *in testing*, and immediately enabling a new
feature as soon as the fsck tool in unstable supports it is too soon.

In that case this report should probably be reassigned to e2fsprogs,
as a request to stop enabling orphan_file by default until at least the
time that e2fsprogs (>= 1.47.0) has reached testing (but perhaps lower
risk to delay enabling it by default until post-bookworm).

Cyril, sorry if I've been saying "d-i" too often here: I don't know
which bits of this are a d-i responsibility and which are a debian-cd
responsibility. I reported this to installation-reports because I didn't
know which component was causing this, only that an installation that
I thought was intended to be a supported use-case had failed.

    smcv
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.