On Tue, 2021-02-16 at 16:45 -0500, Gary Dale wrote: > On 2021-02-13 03:02, Andrei POPESCU wrote: > > On Vi, 12 feb 21, 17:00:41, Gary Dale wrote: > > > Which is why I think it would be useful to have way to rollback a > > > package > > > when you can't fix it quickly. That way you aren't asking all the > > > users to > > > do it themselves and track the bug status individually. When the > > > maintainers > > > think they have a fix, it can go through the normal process... > > Debian doesn't support downgrading of packages. > > > > When dpkg installs another version of a package (typically newer) > > it > > basically overwrites the existing version and runs the > > corresponding > > package scripts from the to be installed version. > > > > A newer package may introduce changes that the older package > > (scripts) > > can't deal with. In practice it does work in many cases, except for > > those where it doesn't. Fixing them would require a time machine ;) > > > > A roll-back, especially if automatic, could introduce more issues > > than > > it fixes. > > > > Someone(tm) has to determine on a case by case basis whether > > rolling > > back makes sense and the system administrator is in the best > > position to > > do so. > > > > In theory the package Maintainer could provide a general "hint" > > that > > system administrators could chose to ignore (at their own risk). > > > > Currently the infrastructure for this doesn't exist[1] and, > > besides, I'd > > rather have Maintainers focus on fixing the newer package instead. > > > > > > Volunteer time is precious! > > > > > > [1] it would need support in the Debian archive software and APT at > > a > > minimum. > > > > Besides, there is already an arguably safer (though hackish) way to > > achieve that by uploading a package with > > version+really.the.old.version > > instead. > > > > In this case the Maintainer can also take care to adjust the > > package > > scripts accordingly. > > > > Random example found on my system: > > > > $ rmadison fonts-font-awesome > > fonts-font-awesome | 4.2.0~dfsg-1 | > > oldoldstable | source, all > > fonts-font-awesome | 4.7.0~dfsg-1 | > > oldstable | source, all > > fonts-font-awesome | 5.0.10+really4.7.0~dfsg-1 | > > stable | source, all > > fonts-font-awesome | 5.0.10+really4.7.0~dfsg-4~bpo10+1 | buster- > > backports | source, all > > fonts-font-awesome | 5.0.10+really4.7.0~dfsg-4 | > > testing | source, all > > fonts-font-awesome | 5.0.10+really4.7.0~dfsg-4 | > > unstable | source, all > > > > > > Kind regards, > > Andrei > > I hear you, but the issue is that if I revert to a previous version, > then I have to hold it to stop the buggy version from clobbering it > every day. And I have to monitor the Testing version for changes to > see > when a fix is potentially available so I can remove the hold. > > Not just me but every user who is experiencing the bug also has to do > this. > > There is a kludge for this if the buggy version didn't contain > critical > security fixes - re-release the previous version with a slightly > higher > version number than the buggy one (e.g. 3.7.0-5a). When the bug is > (finally) fixed, give the fixed version a slightly higher number > still > (e.g. 3.7.0.5b). > > Again this would only be done where it appears that fixing the bug > may > take time (it's been over a month now). If I were to do the > alternative > - pull packages from Sid - I have no real indication if they fix it > or > introduce even worse problems. > > I can only assume that the reason a fix hasn't made it down through > Sid > yet is that it's not simple. My suggestion isn't to make more work > for > maintainers but rather to take the time pressure off them without > leaving us testers to jump through hoops. > > Hi, What appears to be the fixed version is in sid (3.7.0-7). It has to pass in sid for 10 days before migration to testing, see below link. https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/gnutls28 https://metadata.ftp-master.debian.org/changelogs//main/g/gnutls28/gnutls28_3.7.0-7_changelog My testing with filezilla, shows all to be working once more, though testing has been limited. Regards Phil -- *** Playing the game for the games own sake. *** WWW: https://kathenas.org Twitter: @kathenasorg IRC: kathenas GPG: 724AA9B52F024C8B
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part