[opensuse-packaging] How to deal with divergent SLE/Leap changelog?
Hi all, I'm trying to find out how I can solve diverging changelogs in SLE/Leap and Factory. There were some patches in SLE12 SP3, which are not needed (and are in fact harmful) in SLE12 SP4. 1. When I take the Factory package and submit it to SLE12 SP4, the submission gets rejected, because some (SP3) patches are not mentioned in the changelog. 2. When I start with the SP3 package and update it manually, leaperbot complains that it does not follow Factory first policy. Release managers tell me I should merge the changes in Factory and resubmit. 3. When I submit the merged changelog, the request gets declined: https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/632515 Is the correct process to keep a non-working makedumpfile in SLE12 SP4 and wait until the situation gets escalated by a SUSE partner during Beta testing (which is what I did, effectively)? Please, advise. TIA, Petr T -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
Petr Tesarik wrote:
Hi all,
I'm trying to find out how I can solve diverging changelogs in SLE/Leap and Factory. There were some patches in SLE12 SP3, which are not needed (and are in fact harmful) in SLE12 SP4.
1. When I take the Factory package and submit it to SLE12 SP4, the submission gets rejected, because some (SP3) patches are not mentioned in the changelog.
You can submit packages from Factory just fine. The condition is only that bug references must not get lost. Patch names do not matter. So usually you would retrofit the bug references to the Factory changelog entry that updated the package to a version that contained the bug fixes. cu Ludwig -- (o_ Ludwig Nussel //\ V_/_ http://www.suse.com/ SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
Hi Ludwig,
On Mon, 3 Sep 2018 13:10:10 +0200
Ludwig Nussel
Petr Tesarik wrote:
Hi all,
I'm trying to find out how I can solve diverging changelogs in SLE/Leap and Factory. There were some patches in SLE12 SP3, which are not needed (and are in fact harmful) in SLE12 SP4.
1. When I take the Factory package and submit it to SLE12 SP4, the submission gets rejected, because some (SP3) patches are not mentioned in the changelog.
You can submit packages from Factory just fine. The condition is only that bug references must not get lost. Patch names do not matter. So
Thanks. Unfortunately, it would not really help here, because the bugs themselves were SLE/Leap-specific. Essentially, recent versions of makedumpfile do not work with older kernels (including SP3 kernel), so the package broke after being updated (as a result of an ECO). This situation never happened in Factory, because the kernel was already new enough when makedumpfile was updated. It's probably not worth trying to fix the upstream package to stay compatible with outdated kernel versions, so I reverted some upstream commits instead. Oh, and the update in SP4 is necessary, because old makedumpfile versions do not work with newer kernels (e.g. the SP4 kernel). Petr T
usually you would retrofit the bug references to the Factory changelog entry that updated the package to a version that contained the bug fixes.
cu Ludwig
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
Hi, On Mon, 3 Sep 2018, Petr Tesarik wrote:
I'm trying to find out how I can solve diverging changelogs in SLE/Leap and Factory. There were some patches in SLE12 SP3, which are not needed (and are in fact harmful) in SLE12 SP4.
1. When I take the Factory package and submit it to SLE12 SP4, the submission gets rejected, because some (SP3) patches are not mentioned in the changelog.
You can submit packages from Factory just fine. The condition is only that bug references must not get lost. Patch names do not matter. So
Thanks. Unfortunately, it would not really help here, because the bugs themselves were SLE/Leap-specific.
You still can mention them in the factory changes. Sometimes I bring over the .changes entry verbatim from the respective SLE package into the factory one (just the entry, not the patches themself of course), sometimes I create a new .changes entry ala: "- also fixes bnc#....". Ciao, Michael. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
V Mon, 3 Sep 2018 13:12:10 +0000 (UTC)
Michael Matz
Hi,
On Mon, 3 Sep 2018, Petr Tesarik wrote:
I'm trying to find out how I can solve diverging changelogs in SLE/Leap and Factory. There were some patches in SLE12 SP3, which are not needed (and are in fact harmful) in SLE12 SP4.
1. When I take the Factory package and submit it to SLE12 SP4, the submission gets rejected, because some (SP3) patches are not mentioned in the changelog.
You can submit packages from Factory just fine. The condition is only that bug references must not get lost. Patch names do not matter. So
Thanks. Unfortunately, it would not really help here, because the bugs themselves were SLE/Leap-specific.
You still can mention them in the factory changes. Sometimes I bring over the .changes entry verbatim from the respective SLE package into the factory one (just the entry, not the patches themself of course), sometimes I create a new .changes entry ala: "- also fixes bnc#....".
That's the approach that failed here: https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/632515
Dominique Leuenberger Request got declined about 4 hours ago
auto-submitted, and obviously not correct: changelog talks of a lot of syncup with SLE and new pacthes - but those patches do not show up
Petr T -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
Hi, On Mon, 3 Sep 2018, Petr Tesarik wrote:
You still can mention them in the factory changes. Sometimes I bring over the .changes entry verbatim from the respective SLE package into the factory one (just the entry, not the patches themself of course), sometimes I create a new .changes entry ala: "- also fixes bnc#....".
That's the approach that failed here: https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/632515
Dominique Leuenberger Request got declined about 4 hours ago
auto-submitted, and obviously not correct: changelog talks of a lot of syncup with SLE and new pacthes - but those patches do not show up
Perhaps because the submit was done by a non-human Dominique was more cautious? Or because there was just some mis-reading in your changelog: +- Merge SLE12 changelog. +- Patches that were never actually applied to Factory: + * makedumpfile-x86_64-xen-vtop.patch (included in 1.6.2) + * makedumpfile-Fix-elf_info-file_size-if-segment-excluded.patch + (included in 1.6.2) It would be more obvious that the non-existing patches are non-existing because they are already included in the factory state if you've said something along the lines of "Patches from SLE12 that are obsolete in this version: <list>". Sure your "(included in") say this already, but misreadings happen ... Ciao, Michael. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
On 03/09/2018 19:11, Petr Tesarik wrote:
Hi all,
I'm trying to find out how I can solve diverging changelogs in SLE/Leap and Factory. There were some patches in SLE12 SP3, which are not needed (and are in fact harmful) in SLE12 SP4.
1. When I take the Factory package and submit it to SLE12 SP4, the submission gets rejected, because some (SP3) patches are not mentioned in the changelog.
2. When I start with the SP3 package and update it manually, leaperbot complains that it does not follow Factory first policy. Release managers tell me I should merge the changes in Factory and resubmit.
3. When I submit the merged changelog, the request gets declined: https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/632515
Is the correct process to keep a non-working makedumpfile in SLE12 SP4 and wait until the situation gets escalated by a SUSE partner during Beta testing (which is what I did, effectively)?
Please, advise.
Normally I just create a separate entry saying something along the lines of: This version of the package was not affected by the following bugs / issues from SLE12 SP3: * bsc#1234567 * CVE-XXXX-XXXX -- Simon Lees (Simotek) http://simotek.net Emergency Update Team keybase.io/simotek SUSE Linux Adelaide Australia, UTC+10:30 GPG Fingerprint: 5B87 DB9D 88DC F606 E489 CEC5 0922 C246 02F0 014B
participants (4)
-
Ludwig Nussel -
Michael Matz -
Petr Tesarik -
Simon Lees