<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<atom:link href="http://dev1galaxy.org/extern.php?action=feed&amp;tid=3410&amp;type=rss" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<title><![CDATA[Dev1 Galaxy Forum / ASCII: can't install zfsutils-linux from backports -missing dependency]]></title>
		<link>http://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?id=3410</link>
		<description><![CDATA[The most recent posts in ASCII: can't install zfsutils-linux from backports -missing dependency.]]></description>
		<lastBuildDate>Tue, 05 May 2020 14:18:08 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>FluxBB</generator>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: ASCII: can't install zfsutils-linux from backports -missing dependency]]></title>
			<link>http://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=21449#p21449</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<div class="quotebox"><cite>dev-1-dash-1 wrote:</cite><blockquote><div><p>The beowulf package tree is apparently ready, the thing that&#039;s being worked on right now are the install images themselves.</p></div></blockquote></div><p>Promising, but I don&#039;t run betas on servers... And I don&#039;t run Devuan on desktops, because it&#039;s simply too out of date.</p><div class="quotebox"><blockquote><div><p>You can use debootstrap (ascii or beowulf version) to set up your system. That&#039;s the smallest and slickest install image available, seems to have no bugs right now.</p></div></blockquote></div><p>Honestly, I don&#039;t care about install images. I run Gentoo on my desktop(s), I&#039;m fine with a stage-1 tarball. I reinstall servers pretty much never.<br />What I do care about is running a LAMP stack that still has some measure of upstream support.</p><div class="quotebox"><blockquote><div><p>Maybe try Arch Linux?</p></div></blockquote></div><p>Systemd-only, breaks constantly, requires hand-holding for the most minor of updates, community doesn&#039;t understand concepts such as unattended-upgrades or headless servers. Been there. Spent quite some time there in fact.</p><div class="quotebox"><blockquote><div><p>Seriously though, devuan is working slow and steady. That approach is good for stability. And general health of your systems</p></div></blockquote></div><p>What&#039;s <em>not</em> good for the health of anyone&#039;s systems is having to pull in backports on release-day and resort to local compiles or third-party repos just to get, for example, a version of PHP that <em>anyone anywhere</em> is still using.</p><p>There&#039;s stability, and then there&#039;s being stuck with bugs, security issues, and compatibility problems forever. Debian walks a fine-line on this, Devuan is currently still a fair way over it.</p><div class="quotebox"><blockquote><div><p>Had this happened on a production server, I would have done the same or cancelled the upgrade altogether.<br />I did make a snapshot before the upgrade, ability to do so is the primary reason to use zfs for me.</p></div></blockquote></div><p>Here&#039;s the thing: I <em>do</em> run devuan on production systems.<br />Snapshots are all well and good, but they&#039;re no substitute for properly maintained packages that actually work.<br />Here&#039;s what happens: <br />Bug is found in Debian package.<br />Upstream fix makes it into release before freeze, or is not considered worthy of backporting and lands in Sid.<br />Devuan is stuck with bug for another 2 years because it&#039;s tracking oldstable, which only gets critical fixes.</p><p>Snapshots are no substitute for shipping software components that are still receiving upstream security support either. <br />Debian, for example, despite the reputation for ancient packages, bumps their PHP packages roughly in-step (2 years) with upstream security support. Devuan is still shipping PHP7.0, which is now <em>5 years old</em> and went EOL over a year ago.</p><p>How many large upstreams (e.g. all of e-commerce) do you think support running their projects on a stack released in 2015 and no longer receiving patches?<br />Some of them put up with Debian, because userbase. None make exceptions for Devuan.</p><p>Buggering about with polkit/gnome/whatever shiny desktop thing is wanted in the moment is all well and good. Sitting on a release to do so while the server side (i.e. the primary domain of GNU/Linux in general and Debian in specific) rots is not.</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (steve_v)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Tue, 05 May 2020 14:18:08 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=21449#p21449</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: ASCII: can't install zfsutils-linux from backports -missing dependency]]></title>
			<link>http://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=21448#p21448</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<div class="quotebox"><cite>steve_v wrote:</cite><blockquote><div><p>I generally take the same approach, because I like unattended-upgrades. In the specific case of ZFS though, I was using it some time before it was in the (then Debian Squeeze) repos</p></div></blockquote></div><p>I only use zfs since jessie, so I started when all the stuff was already conviniently packaged.</p><div class="quotebox"><blockquote><div><p>Frankly, I&#039;ve been waiting for beowulf for far longer than I would usually have patience for, at this point my systems are on average only about 85% Devuan I&#039;ve had to backport so many things.</p></div></blockquote></div><p>The beowulf package tree is apparently ready, the thing that&#039;s being worked on right now are the install images themselves.<br />You can use debootstrap (ascii or beowulf version) to set up your system. That&#039;s the smallest and slickest install image available, seems to have no bugs right now. I&#039;ve done so, and everything seems to work fine, including zfs root. As I said, I&#039;ve almost jumped ship from jessie myself.</p><div class="quotebox"><blockquote><div><p>Moral support is now pretty much the only reason I haven&#039;t given up in disgust and moved to something with a sane release cycle.</p></div></blockquote></div><p>Maybe try Arch Linux? I&#039;ve heard they have more frequent releases... <img src="http://dev1galaxy.org/img/smilies/big_smile.png" width="15" height="15" alt="big_smile" /></p><div class="quotebox"><blockquote><div><p>As much as I do understand the reasons, being stuck with a three year old Debian release for eternity does not make for a nice user experience. Still waiting for that beowulf stable thing...</p></div></blockquote></div><p>Seriously though, devuan is working slow and steady. That approach is good for stability. And general health of your systems (including your nervous one).<br />And yes, I also wish beowulf would be done already.</p><div class="quotebox"><blockquote><div><div class="quotebox"><blockquote><div><p>I&#039;ve solved the problem by installing insserv 1.18 from beowulf. That resolved the conflict and didn&#039;t break anything (that I would notice).</p></div></blockquote></div><p>Personally I prefer to backport things myself and/or compile them locally over adding mixed-release sources. That&#039;s just me though, there&#039;s probably a bad experience behind the it somewhere in the distant past.</p></div></blockquote></div><p>Surely that approach is more reliable in general. Had this happened on a production server, I would have done the same or cancelled the upgrade altogether.<br />I did make a snapshot before the upgrade, ability to do so is the primary reason to use zfs for me.</p><div class="quotebox"><blockquote><div><div class="quotebox"><blockquote><div><p>I just thought posting an exact problem report on this forum should suffice.</p></div></blockquote></div><p>I would have thought the Devuan bugtracker would be a better place, but then the thing is kinda confusing to navigate considering the relationship with upstream Debian bugtracking...<br />I mean this is probably a Debian bug, right?</p></div></blockquote></div><p>Devuan team must be working their asses off trying to release beowulf any minute now. Right? I mean they <em>have</em> to be, right?<br />Let&#039;s not disturb them.</p><p>After they release beowulf, we can bombard them with bug reports for ascii. </p><p>As to whose bug this is, I leave it to the devuan team to comment on this one.</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (dev-1-dash-1)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Tue, 05 May 2020 13:19:21 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=21448#p21448</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: ASCII: can't install zfsutils-linux from backports -missing dependency]]></title>
			<link>http://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=21445#p21445</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<div class="quotebox"><cite>dev-1-dash-1 wrote:</cite><blockquote><div><p>My policy is always use the official sources, only compile your own version if you absolutely need it and it isn&#039;t there in the official repos.<br />Or else why would I even be using an apt/dpkg based distro ? <img src="http://dev1galaxy.org/img/smilies/smile.png" width="15" height="15" alt="smile" /></p></div></blockquote></div><p>I generally take the same approach, because I like unattended-upgrades. In the specific case of ZFS though, I was using it some time before it was in the (then Debian Squeeze) repos, so I already have a check version -&gt; print new bugs -&gt; compile -&gt; install shell script lurking around. Kept using it when moving to Devuan because it was late into the repos (like everything else), and I don&#039;t see a point in changing now.<br />That and ZFS modules are something I <em>want</em> to manually vet updates for, because I&#039;m a bit of a data-hoarder and my pool is important to me.</p><div class="quotebox"><cite>dev-1-dash-1 wrote:</cite><blockquote><div><p>I know it&#039;s 0.8.3, and I am already packed and almost ready to move on to beowulf pastures, which has exactly that version in it&#039;s backports.</p></div></blockquote></div><p>Frankly, I&#039;ve been waiting for beowulf for far longer than I would usually have patience for, at this point my systems are on average only about 85% Devuan I&#039;ve had to backport so many things. <br />Moral support is now pretty much the only reason I haven&#039;t given up in disgust and moved to something with a sane release cycle.</p><p>As much as I do understand the reasons, being stuck with a three year old Debian release for eternity does not make for a nice user experience. Still waiting for that beowulf stable thing...</p><div class="quotebox"><blockquote><div><p>I&#039;ve solved the problem by installing insserv 1.18 from beowulf. That resolved the conflict and didn&#039;t break anything (that I would notice).</p></div></blockquote></div><p>Personally I prefer to backport things myself and/or compile them locally over adding mixed-release sources. That&#039;s just me though, there&#039;s probably a bad experience behind the it somewhere in the distant past.</p><div class="quotebox"><blockquote><div><p>I just thought posting an exact problem report on this forum should suffice.</p></div></blockquote></div><p>I would have thought the Devuan bugtracker would be a better place, but then the thing is kinda confusing to navigate considering the relationship with upstream Debian bugtracking...<br />I mean this is probably a Debian bug, right?</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (steve_v)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Tue, 05 May 2020 12:07:58 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=21445#p21445</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: ASCII: can't install zfsutils-linux from backports -missing dependency]]></title>
			<link>http://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=21444#p21444</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<div class="quotebox"><cite>steve_v wrote:</cite><blockquote><div><p>FWIW (and admittedly not really an answer to your question), I find it far easier to just build ZFS from upstream sources than to muck about with backports and Debian/merged packages.</p><p>./configure --prefix=/usr --enable-sysvinit --disable-systemd<br />make<br />make deb-dkms<br />make deb-utils<br />dpkg -i ./*.deb</p><p>And you get a not-ancient ZFS build to boot. <img src="http://dev1galaxy.org/img/smilies/big_smile.png" width="15" height="15" alt="big_smile" /></p></div></blockquote></div><p>Thanks for your reply.<br />I&#039;ll keep in mind the fact that it&#039;s so easy to build directly from upstream.</p><p>Zfs from the official devuan/debian repops always worked fine for me, and I didn&#039;t need any particular feature from newer versions, so I just used that. For ascii, the earlier zfs version is ok, just when using the newer one from backports this conflict appears.</p><p>My policy is always use the official sources, only compile your own version if you absolutely need it and it isn&#039;t there in the official repos.<br />Or else why would I even be using an apt/dpkg based distro ? <img src="http://dev1galaxy.org/img/smilies/smile.png" width="15" height="15" alt="smile" /></p><div class="quotebox"><blockquote><div><p>Upstream is at v0.8.3 right now, and there are some nice improvements over the crusty release Debian/Devuan is shipping.</p></div></blockquote></div><p>I know it&#039;s 0.8.3, and I am already packed and almost ready to move on to beowulf pastures, which has exactly that version in it&#039;s backports. </p><div class="quotebox"><blockquote><div><p>ZFS works just fine on ASCII with insserv 1.14, and it has since 0.6.x, at least with the init scripts from upstream.</p></div></blockquote></div><p>On that particular system, I&#039;ve solved the problem by installing insserv 1.18 from beowulf. That resolved the conflict and didn&#039;t break anything (that I would notice).</p><div class="quotebox"><blockquote><div><p>Dunno what&#039;s wrong with the distro packaging, I don&#039;t immediately see a bug report explaining the conflict either.</p></div></blockquote></div><p>I just thought posting an exact problem report on this forum should suffice.</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (dev-1-dash-1)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Tue, 05 May 2020 11:02:03 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=21444#p21444</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: ASCII: can't install zfsutils-linux from backports -missing dependency]]></title>
			<link>http://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=21442#p21442</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>FWIW (and admittedly not really an answer to your question), I find it far easier to just build ZFS from upstream sources than to muck about with backports and Debian/merged packages.</p><p>./configure --prefix=/usr --enable-sysvinit --disable-systemd<br />make<br />make deb-dkms<br />make deb-utils<br />dpkg -i ./*.deb</p><p>And you get a not-ancient ZFS build to boot. <img src="http://dev1galaxy.org/img/smilies/big_smile.png" width="15" height="15" alt="big_smile" /> Upstream is at v0.8.3 right now, and there are some nice improvements over the crusty release Debian/Devuan is shipping. </p><p>ZFS works just fine on ASCII with insserv 1.14, and it has since 0.6.x, at least with the init scripts from upstream. <br />Dunno what&#039;s wrong with the distro packaging, I don&#039;t immediately see a bug report explaining the conflict either.</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (steve_v)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Tue, 05 May 2020 06:22:26 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=21442#p21442</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: ASCII: can't install zfsutils-linux from backports -missing dependency]]></title>
			<link>http://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=20827#p20827</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>Here&#039;s aptitude&#039;s info screen for zfsutils-linux. It shows it in an already installed state, after I pulled in insserv 1.18 from beowulf.<br />But you can see , under the line <span class="bbc">--\ insserv (&lt; 1.18)</span>, all versions of insserv present in the official ascii repos, and the only one is 1.14,<br />which is not compatible with this version of zfsutils-linux.</p><div class="codebox"><pre class="vscroll"><code>i    --\ zfsutils-linux                                                                                                                                          0.7.12-2+deb10 0.7.12-2+deb10
  Description: command-line tools to manage OpenZFS filesystems

  Homepage: http://www.zfsonlinux.org/
  Tags: admin::configuring, admin::filesystem, interface::commandline, role::program, scope::utility, use::configuring
  Priority: optional
  Section: contrib/admin
  Maintainer: Debian ZFS on Linux maintainers &lt;pkg-zfsonlinux-devel@alioth-lists.debian.net&gt;
  Architecture: amd64
  Compressed Size: 290 k
  Uncompressed Size: 1,087 k
  Source Package: zfs-linux
  Origin: Devuan Backports:2.0.0/stable-backports [amd64]
  Origin URI: http://deb.devuan.org/merged/pool/DEBIAN/contrib/z/zfs-linux/zfsutils-linux_0.7.12-2+deb10u1~bpo9+1_amd64.deb
  --- Depends (11)
  --- Recommends (3)
  --- Suggests (3)
  --\ Conflicts (6)
    --\ insserv (&lt; 1.18)                                                                                                                                                                      
p     1.14.0-5.4+b1
    --- insserv (&lt; 1.18)
    --- zfs
    --- zfs-fuse
    --- zfs-fuse
    --- zfsutils-linux 
  --- Breaks (4)
  --- Package names provided by zfsutils-linux (1)
  --- Packages which depend on zfsutils-linux (16)
  --\ Versions of zfsutils-linux (3)
p    0.6.5.9-5
p    0.7.3-3+devuan1
i    0.7.12-2+deb10u1~bpo9+1</code></pre></div>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (dev-1-dash-1)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Mon, 30 Mar 2020 21:41:44 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=20827#p20827</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ASCII: can't install zfsutils-linux from backports -missing dependency]]></title>
			<link>http://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=20826#p20826</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>ASCII: Can&#039;t install <span class="bbc">zfsutils-linux</span> version <span class="bbc">0.7.12-2+deb10u1~bpo9+1</span> from backports, due to missing dependency.<br />The package conflicts with package <span class="bbc">insserv (&lt;1.18)</span>, but the highest version of <span class="bbc">insserv</span> in ascii repositories is <span class="bbc">1.14.0-5.4+b1</span>.</p><p>Therefore it&#039;s not possible to install this newer version of zfsutils-linux without pulling in <span class="bbc">insserv 1.18.0-2</span> from beowulf.</p><p>Is it safe to use beowulf&#039;s insserv on ascii, and if so, why isn&#039;t it present in ascii repositories, making it impossible to install latest version of zfsutils-linux?</p><p>How to reproduce:<br />1 Have an ascii system running.<br />2 Enable backports<br />3 Install zfs-dkms 0.7.12-2 (from backports) and neccessary packages<br />4 Try to install zfsutils-linux 0.7.12-2 (from backports).</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (dev-1-dash-1)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Mon, 30 Mar 2020 21:38:25 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=20826#p20826</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
