1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. LINUX.DEBIAN.BUGS.RC

  • Bug#1061185: apt-verify: unsupportable

    From Simon Josefsson@21:1/5 to Simon Josefsson on Mon Feb 17 23:20:01 2025
    severity 1061185 important
    thanks

    I'm downgrading this due to lack of explanation what is the 'serious'
    severity level problem.

    /Simon

    Simon Josefsson <simon@josefsson.org> writes:

    Hi! You re-opened this ITP bug and changed the title to 'apt-verify: unsupportable' and made it a RC bug. It is not clear to me what makes
    you believe this is a serious bug in this package, since you gave no justification. Can you clarify what your actionable concerns are?

    /Simon


    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

    iQNoBAEWCAMQFiEEo8ychwudMQq61M8vUXIrCP5HRaIFAmezs8oUHHNpbW9uQGpv c2Vmc3Nvbi5vcmfCHCYAmDMEXJLOtBYJKwYBBAHaRw8BAQdACIcrZIvhrxDBkK9f V+QlTmXxo2naObDuGtw58YaxlOu0JVNpbW9uIEpvc2Vmc3NvbiA8c2ltb25Aam9z ZWZzc29uLm9yZz6IlgQTFggAPgIbAwULCQgHAgYVCAkKCwIEFgIDAQIeAQIXgBYh BLHSvRN1vst4TPT4xNc89jjFPAa+BQJl/YgIBQkLehFUAAoJENc89jjFPAa+CboA +wUa06RD5e5VTCxvSWtPS75Wq2qBeYGZnf0jvUMxa2n4AP4xkUeAPPnNuMsTm2fs FCDIGaEM2Yn6Vb2huzzT1Fw/BLgzBFySz4EWCSsGAQQB2kcPAQEHQOxTCIOaeXAx I2hIX4HK9bQTpNVei708oNr1Klm8qCGKiPUEGBYIACYCGwIWIQSx0r0Tdb7LeEz0 +MTXPPY4xTwGvgUCZf2IKwUJC3oQqgCBdiAEGRYIAB0WIQSjzJyHC50xCrrUzy9R cisI/kdFogUCXJLPgQAKCRBRcisI/kdFoqdMAQCgH45aseZgIrwKOvUOA9QfsmeE 8GZHYNuFHmM9FEQS6AD6A4x5aYvoY6lo98pgtw2HPDhmcCXFItjXCrV4A0GmJA4J ENc89jjFPAa+GcYA/26YQY05bLtnXiIjTiAzrGQrRXxTHPA8Av7TDFHvIetWAP9s HSoU8OfTwmTiEnGwLlsV7QJclZg3YNz/Ypcp9TqQBrg4BFySz2oSCisGAQQBl1UB BQEBB0AxlRumDW6nZY7A+VCfek9VpEx6PJmdJyYPt3lNHMd6HAMBCAeIfgQYFggA JgIbDBYhBLHSvRN1vst4TPT4xNc89jjFPAa+BQJl/YgwBQkLehDGAAoJENc89jjF PAa+phoA/jrDqIrl/55vUMBhIQv+TP635d2iCTEnyFmbUcP9+gh6APoDsXalVd2c OGxQtSC+TF8PkZMn1TLkJKAjVxr+xx40AgAKCRBRcisI/kdFor7LAP9RuktLW/Hd ROYvcyuDntTh4thaQKUGst8ozmWK/jAwKQEAt2tYuv+A8B3y5+YvLg/GijcN75Ud VxVFqugk/9elZAo=
    =PSjA
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Simon Josefsson@21:1/5 to jeremy.bicha@canonical.com on Mon Feb 17 23:30:01 2025
    Jeremy Bícha <jeremy.bicha@canonical.com> writes:

    Control: severity -1 serious

    On Mon, Feb 17, 2025 at 5:10 PM Simon Josefsson <simon@josefsson.org> wrote:

    severity 1061185 important
    thanks

    I'm downgrading this due to lack of explanation what is the 'serious'
    severity level problem.

    /Simon

    Simon Josefsson <simon@josefsson.org> writes:

    Hi! You re-opened this ITP bug and changed the title to 'apt-verify:
    unsupportable' and made it a RC bug. It is not clear to me what makes
    you believe this is a serious bug in this package, since you gave no
    justification. Can you clarify what your actionable concerns are?

    I apologize for not replying sooner.

    apt-verify has a defacto RC bug or equivalent because apt has
    Conflicts: apt-verify.

    Notice how it is unable to migrate to Testing because of the piuparts regression: https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/apt-verify

    I am bumping the severity back to serious just so that someone who
    visits that tracker page (or the similar excuses pages) has a handy
    link to more explanation why this package is unable to migrate to
    Testing. There is history in previous comments to this bug. I am not personally involved in apt maintenance or deciding whether there
    should or shouldn't be a Conflicts here.

    I don't understand this -- why is it a RC bug if the apt maintainers
    declare a Conflicts with a package? Where in the debian policies do you
    find support for that view?

    It would be nice to resolve the Conflicts in apt too, as an orthogonal
    but related issue, but I've been equally unable to understand what
    actionable change is requested in 'apt-verify'. Could we try to have a discussion about this?

    /Simon

    --=-=-Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

    iQNoBAEWCAMQFiEEo8ychwudMQq61M8vUXIrCP5HRaIFAmeztzIUHHNpbW9uQGpv c2Vmc3Nvbi5vcmfCHCYAmDMEXJLOtBYJKwYBBAHaRw8BAQdACIcrZIvhrxDBkK9f V+QlTmXxo2naObDuGtw58YaxlOu0JVNpbW9uIEpvc2Vmc3NvbiA8c2ltb25Aam9z ZWZzc29uLm9yZz6IlgQTFggAPgIbAwULCQgHAgYVCAkKCwIEFgIDAQIeAQIXgBYh BLHSvRN1vst4TPT4xNc89jjFPAa+BQJl/YgIBQkLehFUAAoJENc89jjFPAa+CboA +wUa06RD5e5VTCxvSWtPS75Wq2qBeYGZnf0jvUMxa2n4AP4xkUeAPPnNuMsTm2fs FCDIGaEM2Yn6Vb2huzzT1Fw/BLgzBFySz4EWCSsGAQQB2kcPAQEHQOxTCIOaeXAx I2hIX4HK9bQTpNVei708oNr1Klm8qCGKiPUEGBYIACYCGwIWIQSx0r0Tdb7LeEz0 +MTXPPY4xTwGvgUCZf2IKwUJC3oQqgCBdiAEGRYIAB0WIQSjzJyHC50xCrrUzy9R cisI/kdFogUCXJLPgQAKCRBRcisI/kdFoqdMAQCgH45aseZgIrwKOvUOA9QfsmeE 8GZHYNuFHmM9FEQS6AD6A4x5aYvoY6lo98pgtw2HPDhmcCXFItjXCrV4A0GmJA4J ENc89jjFPAa+GcYA/26YQY05bLtnXiIjTiAzrGQrRXxTHPA8Av7TDFHvIetWAP9s HSoU8OfTwmTiEnGwLlsV7QJclZg3YNz/Ypcp9TqQBrg4BFySz2oSCisGAQQBl1UB BQEBB0AxlRumDW6nZY7A+VCfek9VpEx6PJmdJyYPt3lNHMd6HAMBCAeIfgQYFggA JgIbDBYhBLHSvRN1vst4TPT4xNc89jjFPAa+BQJl/YgwBQkLehDGAAoJENc89jjF PAa+phoA/jrDqIrl/55vUMBhIQv+TP635d2iCTEnyFmbUcP9+gh6APoDsXalVd2c OGxQtSC+TF8PkZMn1TLkJKAjVxr+xx40AgAKCRBRcisI/kdFohecAQD8X9/H4/Oy TSL16QFFUEe53d15ugrrM9AR9YPtgKGx5gEAxPvb+b+U1O669RlguiAuzOJCXaq7 GS+KUpd/oGD8oAM=JTdc
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From =?UTF-8?Q?Jeremy_B=C3=ADcha?=@21:1/5 to simon@josefsson.org on Mon Feb 17 23:40:01 2025
    On Mon, Feb 17, 2025 at 5:24 PM Simon Josefsson <simon@josefsson.org> wrote:
    I don't understand this -- why is it a RC bug if the apt maintainers
    declare a Conflicts with a package? Where in the debian policies do you
    find support for that view?

    apt is Priority: required. It is impossible to install apt-verify on a
    standard Debian install. An uninstallable package cannot possibly be
    part of Debian.

    Perhaps the piuparts section at https://release.debian.org/testing/rc_policy.txt applies if you need a reference.

    Sorry, I am unable to help with the dispute with the apt maintainers.

    Thank you,
    Jeremy Bícha

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)