Re: Trixie

Philip Hands <[email protected]> Thu, 26 Dec 2024 21:31:52 +0100

Newsgroups	gmane.linux.debian.devel.cd
Message-ID	<[email protected]>

Cyril Brulebois <[email protected]> writes:

> Cyril Brulebois <[email protected]> (2024-12-26):
>> The problem on the debian-cd side is different. It uses a d-i daily
>> build that it has no control over, which might need matching udebs
>> that bad luck went away between the d-i build and the debian-cd one.
>
> Seeing how (at least these past few days, weeks, months, or so) udebs
> have piled up in the archive, it's probably more a matter of making sure
> to include the right set of udebs onto the image, instead of picking
> whatever is the latest.
>
> From a cursory look at the context of the recent bugfix (which is
> deeff0673833ae6ae97e3f7f96419254763f1d0f in debian-cd), debian-cd picks
> whatever is the highest version, regardless of what's actually used by
> d-i. In other words that traded a constant problem (not having enough
> space to include linux-image debs) with a transient one (the wrong set
> of udebs might get picked).
>
> Provided there's no immediate decruft in the archive (the current number
> of udebs for past kernels suggests that's not happening), it should just
> be a matter of:
>   1. picking the right set (beware of archs with several flavours) based
>      on info collected from the d-i build;
>   2. bailing out if that version can't be found.
>
> (1) would fix the issue, and only fail to work if and when the decruft
> becomes super aggressive; (2) would avoid building an image that cannot
> work if and when that happens.

Oh, that seems like a good route forward.  I'll try to fit some
experimentation with that in-between family/holiday commitments.

Thanks for the ideas :-)

Cheers, Phil.
-- 
Philip Hands -- https://hands.com/~phil

signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 832 B)