On Wed, 2019-03-13 at 23:16 +0100, Matthias Klumpp wrote:
Am Di., 12. März 2019 um 17:18 Uhr schrieb Jeremiah C. Foster jeremiah.foster@puri.sm:
https://release.debian.org/buster/freeze_policy.html
So Buster is Frozen today if I'm not mistaken. Is there anything we ought to do in our Laniakea for us to track the Freeze? My assumption is that we'll see fewer updates as fewer packages will be accepted into testing.
Jup, but aside from that there is nothing we need to change - all updates will keep flowing into PureOS from Debian's in-development buster suite.
Awesome!
After Buster becomes stable, I assume we'll then just follow that and get security and other important updates as point releases?
Will we want to set up another tracker that then moves to testing to track bullseye/sid? I am not sure we'll need it aside from packages for the Librem 5. But the Librem 5 is ARM v8 and we can build images for that here: https://downloads.puri.sm/phone/
Currently the Librem 5 team has their own CI on a Cavium machine somewhere in Germany.
Also, if Debian removes packages from testing, will those get remove from PureOS? I'm thinking about things like gksu, do we have to manually remove packages that are removed from Debian?
The correct answer to that question is "Maybe" ;-) Laniakea and dak will attempt to remove packages from PureOS that have also been dropped from Debian using the information they have about the package (migration status and most importantly reverse dependencies). The package will be autoremoved if the system sees no point in keeping it, but it is very conservative to ensure PureOS won't break by accident. So in doubt, a package will not be removed.
Excellent. This sounds like a sane, useful setup.
If a package can't be removed, a sync issue is emitted and we can choose to remove it manually. See https://master.pureos.net/synchrotron/ for a list of issues (cruft issues are marked explicitly).
I've noticed those "cruft" notices.
The gksu issue was special, because the package wasn't removed *and* no issue was emitted. I haven't tracked down the cause of this issue yet though, in any case this shouldn't have happened (the expected result would have been the package not being removed and an issue being emitted so this problem could have been dealt with manually).
Cool.
Thanks Matthias.
Jeremiah
Cheers, Matthias