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

Bug#915956: marked as done (nmu: anbox_0.0~git20181014-1)

Your message dated Thu, 13 Dec 2018 01:19:58 +0800
with message-id <CAFyCLW_dEXeBQ+nRJSkmEeyLN2v3yckqknpozYn6vrGVoA1fdQ@mail.gmail.com>
and subject line Re: Bug#915956: nmu: anbox_0.0~git20181014-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #915956,
regarding nmu: anbox_0.0~git20181014-1
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
915956: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=915956
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
Usertags: binnmu

nmu anbox_0.0~git20181014-1 . amd64 arm64 armhf . unstable . -m "Rebuild against lxc3. (Closes: #915821)"

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 1:15 AM Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <pochu@debian.org> wrote:
>
> On 12/12/2018 18:08, Shengjing Zhu wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 1:00 AM Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <pochu@debian.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 08/12/2018 15:39, Shengjing Zhu wrote:
> >>> Package: release.debian.org
> >>> Severity: normal
> >>> User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
> >>> Usertags: binnmu
> >>>
> >>> nmu anbox_0.0~git20181014-1 . amd64 arm64 armhf . unstable . -m "Rebuild against lxc3. (Closes: #915821)"
> >>>
> >>
> >> Why is this needed? Your package anbox depends on lxc and liblxc1 so no binNMU
> >> should be necessary. If anbox is unusable, there may be something else that is
> >> wrong.
> >
> > Launching a lxc container needs a configuration file, and the
> > configuration key is different for lxc2 and lxc3.
> > I think such breakage is not covered by liblxc so version.
> >
> > Anbox upstream determines the lxc version at build time, to choose
> > what configure key to use.
> >
> > https://github.com/anbox/anbox/blob/73b8b63/src/anbox/container/lxc_container.cpp#L50
>
> Sounds like something that should be done at runtime.
>
> For now, a rebuild would fix users that have newer lxc, but it would be possible
> to have the old one with a rebuilt anbox if you don't force a minimum version.
> Thus you should probably do a maintainer upload bumping the build and runtime
> dep to ensure you get the newer configuration.
>

Make sense for me. Let me do maintainer upload instead.

-- 
Shengjing Zhu

--- End Message ---
Reply to: