Bug#1077764: Ruling request on os-release specification implementation

Luca Boccassi <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.linux.debian.devel.ctte
Message-ID <CAMw=ZnSvwqJ-=ZcYdnE19+snHcBBb5XP_Moq3c6adc11w7TJGg__34783.576223866$1722681205$gmane$org@mail.gmail.com>
On Sat, 3 Aug 2024 at 11:20, Paul Gevers <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> On 03-08-2024 11:58, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> >> On the use of tpu:
> >> Personally, until now I fail to see enough value of being able to
> >> distinguish unstable and testing to give the package carrying
> >> /etc/os-release a permanent exception via tpu.
> >
> > Thanks for chiming in - assuming for a moment that it is decided that
> > the change will be implemented, do you see any technical obstacles in
> > using t-p-u as proposed?
>
> The biggest reason I know against using tpu is that it currently isn't
> receiving the same amount of testing (be it automatic (autopkgtest,
> piuparts, in the future reproducibility) or human) as
> unstable-to-testing migrations receive. For the automatic part, that's
> obviously a solvable problem (and already on my todo list for YEARS),
> but currently not the case. It also *always* requires human intervention
> by the Release Team. Another issue issue with tpu is that binNMU'ing is
> more difficult (I assume that's probably not very often relevant in the
> current case). I recall there are more issues with tpu, but I have
> forgotten them. When I find them, I'll add them.

Thank you. For this particular case: there would be 2 uploads for
every cycle, one at the end to add version numbers (this already
happens, no?), one at the beginning to change the VERSION_CODENAME. I
think from the point of view of requiring manual labour it should be
pretty lightweight compared to the current workload of managing
stable-p-u, at 2 uploads to review once every ~2 years, right?

For the binNMU side, this would be an Architecture: all package, so it
doesn't apply I think, right? It wouldn't be subject to any binary
transition for library bumps or things like that. In the current
proposal I am putting forward it's a binary arch: all with a single
fixed arch-independent text file in /usr/lib/ and a single fixed
symlink in /etc/ to the file in /usr/lib, no maintainer scripts
whatsoever, no dependencies.
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.