Debian Bug report logs - #925411
kernel-package: Not suitable for release

Toggle useless messages

Message #5 received at submit@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>

To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>

Subject: kernel-package: Not suitable for release

Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2019 15:31:27 +0000

Package: kernel-package
Version: 13.018+nmu1
Severity: serious

I discussed the state of kernel-package with Manoj and we agreed (see
below) that it is not currently in a state suitable for release.

Ben.

---
From: Manoj Srivastava <manoj.srivastava.1962@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2019 23:15:30 -0800
Message-ID: <CABkpOEV_OD02cyAMius4w7DC6EjZ5Bm5Eefr0s4ta_w99jm7_g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>
Cc: Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>,  Linux Kbuild mailing list
 <linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org>, Liz Zhang <lizzha@microsoft.com>,  Lili
 Deng <v-lide@microsoft.com>, Riku Voipio <riku.voipio@linaro.org>,  Michal
 Marek <michal.lkml@markovi.net>,  Linux Kernel Mailing List
 <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kbuild: add workaround for Debian make-kpkg


Hi,

   Well, if there are users, then I'll file the return bug, but I'll take a
look to see how but rooted this is, and perhaps even try building personal
imaged Deb packages again (I stopped doing that)

   If should not go into buster in it's current state. It should be killed
dead of it can't be brought back to a working state.

   Manoj

On Thu, Mar 7, 2019, 10:43 PM Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>
wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 6:56 AM Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 2019-03-06 at 22:48 -0800, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > >   Does this have any users?
>
> Recently, I received a regression report.
> So, yes. There are users.
>
>
> > > I can take a stand at making it work, but I am
> > > unsure of there are enough people interested in make-kpkg anymore to
> make
> > > it worthwhile.
> > >
> > >   There is a man pager that might be of minor interest, but that can be
> > > taken over by the kernel team if they want
>
> I do not want to maintain the dying package.
>
>
>
> > [...]
> >
> > I assume you're referring to kernel-img.conf.  I would be happy to add
> > that to linux-base, with some clarification of which settings are
> > understood by which packages.
> >
> > I take it that you don't want kernel-package to be included in buster,
> > so can you open an RC bug to say so?
>
> Also, could you make sure it won't come back to bullseye or later ?
>
> How about Ubuntu? Is it out of your control?
>
>
>
> > Ben.
> >
> > --
> > Ben Hutchings
> > friends: People who know you well, but like you anyway.
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Best Regards
> Masahiro Yamada
>


-- System Information:
Debian Release: buster/sid
  APT prefers unstable-debug
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable-debug'), (500, 'stable-updates'), (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'testing'), (500, 'stable'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Foreign Architectures: i386

Kernel: Linux 4.19.0-4-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_GB.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_GB.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8), LANGUAGE=en_GB.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)
LSM: AppArmor: enabled

Versions of packages kernel-package depends on:
ii  bc               1.07.1-2+b1
ii  binutils         2.31.1-15
ii  build-essential  12.6
ii  bzip2            1.0.6-9
ii  dpkg-dev         1.19.5
ii  file             1:5.35-4
ii  gettext          0.19.8.1-9
ii  kmod             26-1
ii  lzma             9.22-2.1
ii  po-debconf       1.0.21
ii  xmlto            0.0.28-2.1
ii  xz-utils [lzma]  5.2.4-1

Versions of packages kernel-package recommends:
ii  cpio           2.12+dfsg-6
pn  docbook-utils  <none>
ii  kernel-common  13.018+nmu1
pn  uboot-mkimage  <none>

Versions of packages kernel-package suggests:
ii  libncurses-dev  6.1+20181013-2
pn  linux-source    <none>

-- debconf-show failed

Message #10 received at 925411@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Nicholas D Steeves <nsteeves@gmail.com>

To: Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>, 925411@bugs.debian.org

Cc: Manoj Srivastava <manoj.srivastava.1962@gmail.com>

Subject: Re: Bug#925411: kernel-package: Not suitable for release

Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2019 16:19:16 -0600

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Control: severity -1 important
Justification: essential package that works flawlessly for me

Hi,

First, I'd like to thank whoever has been maintaining kernel-package.
I depend on it, and the functionality enabled by this package is one
of the primary reasons I chose Debian over other alternatives--years
ago...  Kernel-package is a killer feature! :-) Reply follows inline.

On Sun, Mar 24, 2019 at 03:31:27PM +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> Package: kernel-package
> Version: 13.018+nmu1
> Severity: serious
> 
> I discussed the state of kernel-package with Manoj and we agreed (see
> below) that it is not currently in a state suitable for release.
> 
> Ben.
> 
> ---
> From: Manoj Srivastava <manoj.srivastava.1962@gmail.com>
> Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2019 23:15:30 -0800
> Message-ID: <CABkpOEV_OD02cyAMius4w7DC6EjZ5Bm5Eefr0s4ta_w99jm7_g@mail.gmail.com>
> To: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>
> Cc: Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>,  Linux Kbuild mailing list
>  <linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org>, Liz Zhang <lizzha@microsoft.com>,  Lili
>  Deng <v-lide@microsoft.com>, Riku Voipio <riku.voipio@linaro.org>,  Michal
>  Marek <michal.lkml@markovi.net>,  Linux Kernel Mailing List
>  <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] kbuild: add workaround for Debian make-kpkg
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
>    Well, if there are users, then I'll file the return bug, but I'll take a
> look to see how but rooted this is, and perhaps even try building personal
> imaged Deb packages again (I stopped doing that)
>

Count me as one of its users.  I use it because it supports old-style
manually configured .config, and it lets one quickly and easily build
a Debian-packaged custom kernel like this:

  make menuconfig
  fakeroot make-kpkg binary-arch \
    --initrd --append-to-version=.${date -I}

The new style kernel packaging is hard to learn how to use, and builds
take much longer for some reason (generation of more packages?).

>    If should not go into buster in it's current state. It should be killed
> dead of it can't be brought back to a working state.
>

13.018+nmu1 on buster works like it always has for me--flawlessly.  I
built upstream vanilla 4.19.31 two days ago.

>    Manoj
> 
> On Thu, Mar 7, 2019, 10:43 PM Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 6:56 AM Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, 2019-03-06 at 22:48 -0800, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > >   Does this have any users?
> >
> > Recently, I received a regression report.
> > So, yes. There are users.
> >
> >
> > > > I can take a stand at making it work, but I am
> > > > unsure of there are enough people interested in make-kpkg anymore to
> > make
> > > > it worthwhile.
> > > >

Please count me as a supremely grateful user.

> > > >   There is a man pager that might be of minor interest, but that can be
> > > > taken over by the kernel team if they want
> >
> > I do not want to maintain the dying package.
> >

Why is it dying?  Do you mean the downward trend on popcon?  ISTM that
this speaks of the success of the kernel team in reducing the benefit
of a custom kernel...so a decline in relevancy for the majority of
users (plus a cultural shift), but as I see it it's still core
functionality that facilitates freedom.

Of course anyone can orphan a package at any time for any reason ;-)

> > > [...]
> > >
> > > I assume you're referring to kernel-img.conf.  I would be happy to add
> > > that to linux-base, with some clarification of which settings are
> > > understood by which packages.
> > >
> > > I take it that you don't want kernel-package to be included in buster,
> > > so can you open an RC bug to say so?
> >
> > Also, could you make sure it won't come back to bullseye or later ?
> >
> > How about Ubuntu? Is it out of your control?
> >

Where are the bugs that make this package unsuitable for release?  My
simple use case is not affected by any of
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?package=kernel-package
and I don't believe this RC bug is justified.

Is there any reason why any buggy kernel-package features can't be
cut?  Removing this package unnecessarily raises the barrier of entry
to building custom kernels...a killer feature of Debian--easy custom
kernels under package management.  Of course, if Debian had a kernel
flavour that met my use case then I might not need kernel-package.
The popcon trend appears to be fairly linear and it seems that there
will still be ~2000 users of the package by the time bullseye is
released.

I've attached my homemade convenience/enhancement wrapper script,
because it's possible that it works around some of the alleged unnamed
issues; my experience with this package has been *flawless*.  This bug
seems to indicate that it's difficult to maintain, so thank you for
your exceptional work on kernel-package.


Sincerely,
Nicholas

[build-kernel (text/plain, attachment)]

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #17 received at 925411@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>

To: Nicholas D Steeves <nsteeves@gmail.com>, 925411@bugs.debian.org

Cc: Manoj Srivastava <manoj.srivastava.1962@gmail.com>

Subject: Re: Bug#925411: kernel-package: Not suitable for release

Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2019 23:23:58 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Control: severity -1 serious

On Sun, 2019-03-24 at 16:19 -0600, Nicholas D Steeves wrote:
> Control: severity -1 important
> Justification: essential package that works flawlessly for me

This was agreed with the maintainer, so you should not override it.

The discussion is here:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/1551888035-13329-1-git-send-email-yamada.masahiro@socionext.com/
but unfortunately Manoj's message didn't get archived there for some
reason.

[...]
> The new style kernel packaging is hard to learn how to use, and builds
> take much longer for some reason (generation of more packages?).
[...]

It sounds like you're looking at the linux source package.  I would
certainly not suggest using that for local custom packages; it's meant
for distributions.

The simple alternative is already included in the kernel tree itself:

    make bindeb-pkg

It does generate some extra packages (linux-headers and linux-libc-dev) 
but that doesn't take very long.  The generated packages don't support
/etc/kernel-img.conf but they do support hooks in /etc/kernel.

> 13.018+nmu1 on buster works like it always has for me--flawlessly.  I
> built upstream vanilla 4.19.31 two days ago.

Bug #890817 also looks like it may be a big problem for current kernel
versions, but apparently you have avoided it.

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings
Larkinson's Law: All laws are basically false.

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #24 received at 925411@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Durand <titetanium@gmail.com>

To: 925411@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Kernel-package: Not suitable for release

Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2019 17:30:45 -0400

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Package: kernel-package
Version: 13.018+nmu1

Just wanted to let you know I'm a user of kernel-package and it works 
fine on my amd64 debian testing machine. Just finished compiling 
linux-5.0.4-amd64 kernel for my specific use case. I'm not seeing any 
major bugs like what I see on my x86 machine which seems to reset the 
.config file after running make-kpkg clean. To work around that bug, I 
just copy the .config to outside of the kernel tree, run make-kpkg 
clean, then copy the .config back to compile. Annoying, but not a 
deal-breaker.

-- 
---
Regards,

Durand Hicks

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Message #29 received at 925411@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: fin4478 fin4478 <fin4478@hotmail.com>

To: "925411@bugs.debian.org" <925411@bugs.debian.org>

Subject: Re: Bug#925411: kernel-package: Not suitable for release

Date: Sat, 6 Apr 2019 07:28:18 +0000

On Sun, 24 Mar 2019 23:23:58 +0000 Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>
wrote:

> 
> The simple alternative is already included in the kernel tree itself:
> 
>     make bindeb-pkg
> 

So no more the make-kpkg command  available in future Debian?

The best kernel for AMD graphics users is this:
https://cgit.freedesktop.org/~agd5f/linux/log/?h=drm-next-5.2-wip

What is the replacement command for this?
fakeroot make-kpkg -j 12 --initrd kernel_image kernel_headers

Message #34 received at 925411@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: fin4478 fin4478 <fin4478@hotmail.com>

To: "925411@bugs.debian.org" <925411@bugs.debian.org>

Subject: Re: Bug#925411: kernel-package: Not suitable for release

Date: Sat, 6 Apr 2019 09:02:28 +0000

On Sat, 6 Apr 2019 07:28:18 +0000 fin4478 fin4478 <fin4478@hotmail.com>
wrote:
> On Sun, 24 Mar 2019 23:23:58 +0000 Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>
> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > The simple alternative is already included in the kernel tree
> > itself:
> > 
> >     make bindeb-pkg
> > 
> 
> So no more the make-kpkg command  available in future Debian?
> 
> The best kernel for AMD graphics users is this:
> https://cgit.freedesktop.org/~agd5f/linux/log/?h=drm-next-5.2-wip
> 
> What is the replacement command for this?
> fakeroot make-kpkg -j 12 --initrd kernel_image kernel_headers
> 
>
 
make -j 12 bindeb-pkg

You need to distribute the linux-libc-dev package with the
linux-image package probably.

Message #39 received at 925411@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Nicholas D Steeves <nsteeves@gmail.com>

To: Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>

Cc: 925411@bugs.debian.org, Manoj Srivastava <manoj.srivastava.1962@gmail.com>

Subject: Re: Bug#925411: kernel-package: Not suitable for release

Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2019 00:20:06 -0400

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hi Ben,

On Sun, Mar 24, 2019 at 11:23:58PM +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> Control: severity -1 serious
> 
> On Sun, 2019-03-24 at 16:19 -0600, Nicholas D Steeves wrote:
> > Control: severity -1 important
> > Justification: essential package that works flawlessly for me
> 
> This was agreed with the maintainer, so you should not override it.
> 
> The discussion is here:
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/1551888035-13329-1-git-send-email-yamada.masahiro@socionext.com/
> but unfortunately Manoj's message didn't get archived there for some
> reason.
>

Maybe I'm missing something, but I couldn't find sufficient
justification there...  That said, I did more tests, because an RC bug
that cuts such a useful package from a release really ought to have
justification.

I can now confirm that at least one dkms module (tp-smapi-dkms)
doesn't build with make-kpkg-generated kernel packages on buster.
Maybe all dkms modules are affected?  Maybe Manoj' message said
something to that affect, and how make-kpkg produces packages that are
defective in this way...and maybe other ways?

> [...]
> > The new style kernel packaging is hard to learn how to use, and builds
> > take much longer for some reason (generation of more packages?).
> [...]
> 
> It sounds like you're looking at the linux source package.  I would
> certainly not suggest using that for local custom packages; it's meant
> for distributions.
> 
> The simple alternative is already included in the kernel tree itself:
> 
>     make bindeb-pkg
>

Ah, yes, thank you! :-)  Regarding documentation, should
Debian-specific bits go on our wiki or be forwarded upstream?  eg: the
top line of BuildADebianKernelPackage says "this is an obsolete now
guide", but then at the bottom it says "make -j`nproc` bindeb-pkg".  I
specifically missed that because first line conveys the message "stop
reading this doc now, it's an obsolete waste of time".

> It does generate some extra packages (linux-headers and linux-libc-dev) 
> but that doesn't take very long.  The generated packages don't support
> /etc/kernel-img.conf but they do support hooks in /etc/kernel.
>

Should users who track a 4.19.x-based branch use buster's
linux-libc-dev headers, or install the ones that correspond to their
custom kernel?

> > 13.018+nmu1 on buster works like it always has for me--flawlessly.  I
> > built upstream vanilla 4.19.31 two days ago.
> 
> Bug #890817 also looks like it may be a big problem for current kernel
> versions, but apparently you have avoided it.
>

For once, yes :-)  Generally I'm unlucky and hit all the bugs haha.


Thanks again for taking the time to reply, I appreciate it!
Also, thank you for your hard work, and for all time spent on the BTS.

Cheers,
Nicholas

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #44 received at 925411@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Yannick Roehlly <yannick.roehlly@gmail.com>

To: 925411@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#925411: kernel-package: Not suitable for release

Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2019 20:46:53 +0200

Hi,

I'm another happy user of make-kpkg. ;-) I've just tested the "make bindeb-
pkg" method. I see two drawback:

- (minor) I didn't find the way to do the same thing as the "--revision" 
  option.

- I see a big advantage of using make-kpkg with dkms. I can keep the kernel
  sources in a directory (that I update with the incremental patches) and I
  don't have to install the generated header for dkms to find them as it can
  use the source directory.

My 2 cents,

Yannick

-- 
Formatted to fit your screen.

Message #49 received at 925411@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>

To: Nicholas D Steeves <nsteeves@gmail.com>

Cc: 925411@bugs.debian.org, Manoj Srivastava <manoj.srivastava.1962@gmail.com>

Subject: Re: Bug#925411: kernel-package: Not suitable for release

Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 02:02:18 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On Mon, 2019-04-08 at 00:20 -0400, Nicholas D Steeves wrote:
[...]
> Ah, yes, thank you! :-)  Regarding documentation, should
> Debian-specific bits go on our wiki or be forwarded upstream?

The bindeb-pkg target is part of the upstream build system, not
something patched in by Debian, so the primary place to document it
should be upstream.

[...]
> Should users who track a 4.19.x-based branch use buster's
> linux-libc-dev headers, or install the ones that correspond to their
> custom kernel?
[...]

No, the only reason to install a custom linux-libc-dev package would be
to provide definitions for new UAPI added in a new kernel version.

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings
Never attribute to conspiracy what can adequately be explained
by stupidity.

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #54 received at 925411@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Helge Kreutzmann <debian@helgefjell.de>

To: 925411@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Count me as happy user of make-kpkg

Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2019 06:05:07 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hello,
I'm quite "suprised" by todays dist-upgrade. I use make-kpkg (with
some wrapper scripts) since I switched to Debian around 2000. I just
build 5.0.7 last Sunday. So this is a bad suprise this late in the
development cycle.

I did not have a chance to read all details of all bugs/links in this
bug report (I'm in a bit of rush at the moment). Hopefully the 
replacement works as flawlessly as make-kpkg did.

Greetings

            Helge
-- 
      Dr. Helge Kreutzmann                     debian@helgefjell.de
           Dipl.-Phys.                   http://www.helgefjell.de/debian.php
        64bit GNU powered                     gpg signed mail preferred
           Help keep free software "libre": http://www.ffii.de/

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #59 received at 925411@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Bastian Blank <bblank@thinkmo.de>

To: 925411@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Removing kernel-package? (was: kernel-package: Not suitable for release)

Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2019 12:12:15 +0100

Hi Manoj

Do you oppose that we finally shoot kernel-package dead, aka remove it
from the archive?

Regards,
Bastian

-- 
Youth doesn't excuse everything.
		-- Dr. Janice Lester (in Kirk's body), "Turnabout Intruder",
		   stardate 5928.5.

Message #64 received at 925411@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Joy Williams <joyjoywill2cii@gmail.com>

To: undisclosed-recipients:;

Subject: Help me please

Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2020 06:50:46 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

I am Miss Joy Williams .My father was a wealth Merchant and He died the
year 2018 after a brief Illness. He has left  2.2 Million US Dollars ,
which I am ready to move through you. I am 23 years old . I am very
interested with you and I want us to do business together. If you can work
with me and get back to me, i shall give you the details about me . thank
you. in your next mail , please provide me with your private number so that
i can have oral discussion with you. Miss Joy Williams

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Message #69 received at 925411-done@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Debian FTP Masters <ftpmaster@ftp-master.debian.org>

To: 270616-done@bugs.debian.org,454350-done@bugs.debian.org,506307-done@bugs.debian.org,560738-done@bugs.debian.org,563376-done@bugs.debian.org,599038-done@bugs.debian.org,618262-done@bugs.debian.org,633559-done@bugs.debian.org,760704-done@bugs.debian.org,769538-done@bugs.debian.org,772664-done@bugs.debian.org,772681-done@bugs.debian.org,783253-done@bugs.debian.org,801577-done@bugs.debian.org,818468-done@bugs.debian.org,826224-done@bugs.debian.org,826315-done@bugs.debian.org,832146-done@bugs.debian.org,833500-done@bugs.debian.org,838292-done@bugs.debian.org,838297-done@bugs.debian.org,838802-done@bugs.debian.org,840911-done@bugs.debian.org,863703-done@bugs.debian.org,865852-done@bugs.debian.org,868058-done@bugs.debian.org,876146-done@bugs.debian.org,890817-done@bugs.debian.org,892521-done@bugs.debian.org,898405-done@bugs.debian.org,902679-done@bugs.debian.org,905732-done@bugs.debian.org,922492-done@bugs.debian.org,922493-done@bugs.debian.org,922494-done@bugs.debian.org,925411-done@bugs.debian.org,925615-done@bugs.debian.org,

Cc: kernel-package@packages.debian.org

Subject: Bug#960377: Removed package(s) from unstable

Date: Tue, 12 May 2020 21:09:11 +0000

Version: 13.018+nmu2+rm

Dear submitter,

as the package kernel-package has just been removed from the Debian archive
unstable we hereby close the associated bug reports.  We are sorry
that we couldn't deal with your issue properly.

For details on the removal, please see https://bugs.debian.org/960377

The version of this package that was in Debian prior to this removal
can still be found using http://snapshot.debian.org/.

Please note that the changes have been done on the master archive and
will not propagate to any mirrors until the next dinstall run at the
earliest.

This message was generated automatically; if you believe that there is
a problem with it please contact the archive administrators by mailing
ftpmaster@ftp-master.debian.org.

Debian distribution maintenance software
pp.
Scott Kitterman (the ftpmaster behind the curtain)

Send a report that this bug log contains spam.