Bug#1003948: bullseye-pu: package systemd/247.3-7

[Cyril Brulebois]

Hallo Michael,

Michael Biebl <biebl at debian.org> (2022-01-18):
> What follows is an annotated list of changes. A full debdiff is also
> attached for your convenience.
> 
> As usual, I CCed debian-boot i.e. kibi for his ack regarding d-i.

Thanks as usual!

>   * udevadm-trigger: do not return immediately on EACCES.
>     Fixes a regression when using systemd-networkd in an unprivileged LXD
>     container. (Closes: #997006)
> 
> https://salsa.debian.org/biebl/systemd/-/commit/6c4f3c69d753edc8ca963c9f6f86f76bd30275c6
> 
> Straightforward cherry-pick from upstream. Confirmed by the bug submitter
> that it fixes the issue in #997006
> 
> Touches udev code but I don't expect any effect on d-i.

I don't think we do too many unprivileged things in d-i, yeah…

FWIW, a quick grep in our packages suggests we have mainly this user:
  https://salsa.debian.org/installer-team/debian-installer-utils/-/blob/master/update-dev

which happily starts with set +e…

>   * Demote systemd-timesyncd from Depends to Recommends.
>     This avoids a dependency cycle between systemd and systemd-timesyncd and
>     thus makes dist upgrades more predictable and robust.
>     It also allows minimal, systemd based containers where no NTP client is
>     strictly necessary.
>     To ensure that systemd-timesyncd is installed in a default installation
>     created by d-i, bump its priority to standard.
>     (Closes: #986651, #993947)
> 
> This one is probably the trickiest (and possibly also the simplest)
> change. It simply breaks a dependency loop between systemd and
> systemd-timesyncd resulting in a more predictable upgrade sequence
> which in turn ensures that modifications of systemd-timesyncd's
> conffiles are preserved on upgrades.
> 
> As systemd is installed during the initial bootstrap phase, where
> Recommends are not considered, we would end up with no
> systemd-timesycnd being installed on fresh installations.
> To avoid that, we'd like to bump the priority of systemd-timesyncd to
> standard in stable (so it is installed via the standard task).

Just as a data point:

I suppose it was a good idea for us (maintainers of the Raspberry Pi
images) to start pulling systemd-timesyncd for all suites then…
  https://salsa.debian.org/raspi-team/image-specs/-/commit/96ac1dcec76e9af65150c4c2c2e5c88a3191504b

While your proposed approach should be sufficient for a lot of use
cases, people building their own images might get a different set of
packages before/after the point release (depending on the tool they
use). I'd probably have looped in the cloud team for such a change, but
ISTR having read recently they install chrony anyway.

I have no strong opinions either way (the fix is trivial, but the change
could be seen as surprising), that seems tricky to me too.


Anyway, no objections for d-i at first glance.


Cheers,
-- 
Cyril Brulebois (kibi at debian.org)            <https://debamax.com/>
D-I release manager -- Release team member -- Freelance Consultant
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/pkg-systemd-maintainers/attachments/20220119/53cfa721/attachment.sig>