Re: Bug#975874: buster-pu: package openjdk-11/11.0.9.1+1-1~deb10u1
On Thu, Dec 03, 2020 at 05:34:25PM +0000, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On Thu, 2020-12-03 at 11:28 +0000, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> > [adding d-java to Cc for greater visibility]
> >
> > On Mon, 2020-11-30 at 09:21 +0000, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2020-11-25 at 20:23 -0800, tony mancill wrote:
> > > > I propose that openjdk-11 be updated to upstream 11.0.9.1+1 in
> > > > the
> > > > upcoming stable point release. This update addresses a
> > > > regression
> > > > [1] introduced in upstream release 11.0.9+11, which is present in
> > > > buster via a security upload [2]. This keeps Debian on par with
> > > > other vendors - e.g. RedHat [3], Ubuntu [4], and AdoptOpenJDK [5]
> > > > -
> > > > and introduces the same upstream version currently available in
> > > > testing and unstable.
> > >
> > > The versioning here appears to cause issues in at least Jenkins -
> > > see
> > > https://issues.jenkins.io/projects/JENKINS/issues/JENKINS-64212
> >
> > Have there been any further issues that people are aware of?
> >
> > The Jenkins fix is not yet available to most users if I understand
> > correctly, so we need to consider the tradeoffs between the
> > regression on the OpenJDK side and requiring manual intervention on
> > Jenkins installations (and possibly other things confused by the
> > version string).
>
> To tie up a couple of IRC conversations with Moritz, the fixed Jenkins
> versions have now been released, so we can probably just tell people
> they need to upgrade.
<phew> I was trying to devise a moral calculus for the trade-off.
I haven't been able find any statistics about the prevalence of JVM
crashes due to the regression, and so reached out to the folks at
AdoptOpenJDK earlier today. They said that they had seen a number of
occurrences prior to the patch.
Given that the JVM bug can affect any application seems to tilt the
scale towards proceeding with the JDK update, so the release of an
upgrade path for Jenkins is a relief.
Thank you to you and Moritz for your work on this.
tony
Reply to: