You are not logged in.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Pages: 1
#1 2023-12-06 16:51:06
Using seatd in Chimaera
Looking at https://pkginfo.devuan.org/seatd there's seatd is 0.7 for daedalus (bookworm), and 0.5 for chimaera (bullseye).
Contrasting that to https://packages.debian.org/seatd where seatd is 0.7 for bookworm, and 0.7 for bullseye-backports.
The Devuan package page for 0.5.0-1 has "Origin: Devuan" which suggests it was manually added to Chimaera?
If so, is the manual addition preventing Amprolla from automatically pulling 0.7.0-6~bpo11+1 from bullseye-backports to chimaera-backports, or is there some other reason that this is not coming across?
Also, the dependencies for libseat1 are seatd | logind, libc6 (>= 2.33), libsystemd0 (>= 238) - shouldn't that be seatd | logind | libsystemd0 (>= 238), libc6 (>= 2.33) ?
3.1415P265E589T932E846R64338
Offline
#2 2024-02-29 16:21:53
Re: Using seatd in Chimaera
*bump*
old-bpo: 0.7.0-6~bpo11+1
stable: 0.7.0-6
testing: 0.8.0-1
unstable: 0.8.0-1
0.8.0-1+b1 ceres excalibur
0.7.0-6 daedalus
0.5.0-1 chimaera
The Debian seatd source at //sources.debian.org/src/seatd/0.7.0-6~bpo11+1/ indicates the upstream sourcecode repository is //git.devuan.org/devuan/seatd
The list of tags has "debian/0.7.0-6" but no "devuan/anything" since 0.5.0-1 (despite daedalus,ceres,excalibur having newer versions), and also no tag matching the bullseye backport 0.7.0-6~bpo11+1.
So I'm assuming that from 0.5.0-2 onwards both Debian and Devuan have been using the same version, and the only actual difference between seatd_0.7.0-6_amd64.deb and seatd_0.7.0-6~bpo11+1_amd64.deb are different libc versions used when compiling the binaries.
Is there any reason installing seatd_0.7.0-6~bpo11+1_amd64.deb from bullseye-backports repo on a chimaera system will cause issues?
3.1415P265E589T932E846R64338
Offline
Pages: 1
