[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#767999: base-files: fails to install with pre-jessie debootstrap

Guillem, KiBi,

(It may be worthwhile taking a moment to read the bug logs of #766459 and

On Fri, Nov 07, 2014 at  8:34:49 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote:
> Control: severity -1 serious
> Control: retitle -1 dpkg: Correct fix breaks bogus assumptions in old debootstrap

I'd say the bug title ought to be "Correct fix makes bug in base-passwd

> On Fri, 2014-11-07 at 02:33:48 +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> > Tests performed on an amd64 host running wheezy, debootstrapping amd64.
> > 
> > Well I bisected the archive and the last debootstrapable jessie release
> > was at 20141102T221202Z; looking at the set of updated packages between
> > that one and the next one, it looks like… dpkg got updated from 1.17.13
> > to 1.17.21. And unsurprisingly reverting current jessie to dpkg 1.17.13
> > makes debootstrap work again.

To stick with Santiago's earlier wording, we are now shooting the next
messenger (this time dpkg, after first working hard against base-files).

> What's making the breakage in debootstrap surface is dpkg 1.17.20, commit
> 9ee62ecfc8937f24a82805a424564997042dd984. At least with my testing
> using a patched debootstrap, and using --foreign + --second-stage to
> inject a dpkg with the reverted commit.
> > A few weeks or even days before the freeze doesn't quite seem to be the
> > right time to introduce (not so) subtle changes in dpkg.
> (So we need to actually freeze months in advance of the freeze… right.)
> The above commit is a *correct* fix for a very old regression, to remove
> a bogus package queue dependency stage in dpkg. The breakage in
> debootstrap in older versions is due to incorrect assumptions, which
> where fixed correctly (not worked around, contrary to what is mentioned
> on its changelog) in 1.0.56. The change was:
> -       x_core_install base-files base-passwd
> +       x_core_install base-passwd
> +       x_core_install base-files
> where debootstrap was expecting that dpkg run to process base-passwd
> first, even though it was passed last. This, on a call to dpkg using
> --force-depends, for essential packages that do not have any kind of
> dependency relationship between them, which makes any such assumption
> be based on something far beyond undefined behavior.

I do agree with all the dpkg reasoning and in a way I'm grateful that dpkg made
this bug surface. But really there shouldn't be any such dependency on the order
of configuration of base-files and base-passwd.

> > Reassigning it
> > to dpkg for now; and cc-ing the release team because of things like the
> > #768346 unblock request.
> I'm going to revert the commit above (only in 1.17.x, it will be kept
> in 1.18.x), because it is very minimal, just reintroduces again an
> unnecessary package queue stage, and such regression is acceptable if
> it makes buggy bootstrappers work again. But a fixed debootstrap (and
> maybe cdebootstrap if that fails too) should really be pushed to stable.

I think you might want to hold off on this revert. See


and Adam's kind testing of that patch.


Attachment: pgpY39nOCFPLW.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: