> On Thu, 13 Jul 2023 at 10:27, Julian Andres Klode
> <julian.klode@canonical.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > I just got reminded that when we wrote the initial phasing code
> > we made it not apply in chroots to avoid breaking builders and
> > things.
> >
> > I'd like to remove that check because it's a bit unexpected. To
> > do that, I'll probably add an option to override the chroot check
> > to apt soon for 23.10 and then we can drop the check in 24.10, or
> > 24.04 even.
> >
> > When the initial code was written, phasing was implemented using
> > policy and respected by the install command. Since then, phasing
> > has moved to the upgrade calculation, using keep back, so there are
> > significantly less concerns as installs no longer respect phasing,
> > so image building is not affected anymore, but upgrading build chroots
> > would be.
>
> If proposed is enabled, and pinned up, can the phasing be ignored on
> the updates pocket?
> Or is there a pinning preference we can use, to again update all our
> chroot code to ensure unphased upgrades are done?
Phasing is not affected by pinning you need to set:
APT::Get::Always-Include-Phased-Updates "true";
I do not think encoding that enabled proposed implies no phasing
is a good idea, because apt shouldn't know specifics about what
suite names mean.
But then again, the phasing code knows about -security right
now, because it disables phasing if there's a security update
between the installed and the phased version (as it cannot
switch candidates, only keep back).
Optimally one day a new solver enables us to um not need to
know that (solver draft: https://magenta.jak-linux.org/bin/solver3.pdf
| https://salsa.debian.org/apt-team/solver3).
--
debian developer - deb.li/jak | jak-linux.org - free software dev
ubuntu core developer i speak de, en
--
ubuntu-devel mailing list
ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
