atrigent 2017-02-03 07:46:49
just a moment
dontknow 2017-02-03 07:48:33
i set up trim for ssd, added some kernel commands to disable stuff etc in jessie. if i upgraded to testing, would it break my setup?
atrigent 2017-02-03 07:52:40
TomTomTo1: http://paste.debian.net/912680/
atrigent 2017-02-03 07:53:33
there are other people complaining about this issue here: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=851667
judd 2017-02-03 07:53:34
Bug http://bugs.debian.org/851667 in openjdk-8-jre-headless (closed, patch, security): «openjdk-8-jre-headless needs Breaks: ca-certificates-java (<< 20160321~)»; severity: serious; opened: 2017-01-17; last modified: 2017-02-03.
TomTomTo1 2017-02-03 07:53:37
atrigent: if you are trying to install a package from jessie-backports you need to specify the -t jessie-backports flag while installing.
atrigent 2017-02-03 07:54:34
ok... so, it seems that you don't have to specify that for packages that are new in jessie-backports?
atrigent 2017-02-03 07:54:49
because we've never had to add that for openjdk-8-jdk
dixie7z 2017-02-03 07:55:29
hello guys. after day of torture I decided to wipe debian stretch but now.... i want to go back again :( im not sure what's the problem... I was unable to boot into debian or ever recovery mode. black screen... with monodeset option set in grub it boots.... so it should be graphic problem... i tried Xubuntu 16.04 new release to reinstall... again, same problem on booting the installation media... black screen... i have amd xfx
dixie7z 2017-02-03 07:55:29
hd6870.... something is messed up in newest release... i changed kernel during troubleshooting, it didn't help... now i'm unable to start installation media for xubuntu... black screen... maybe debian stable will work but for how long?
TomTomTo1 2017-02-03 07:56:35
that only worked because there is no version of openjdk-8-jdk in jessie/main. but now you also need to pull ca-certificates-java from backports, which will not be done if you don't use the -t jessie-backports flag.
atrigent 2017-02-03 07:57:56
sorta seems to me like apt-get should be able to figure that out, since it's already getting one package from there, but yeah, that worked
atrigent 2017-02-03 07:58:03
thanks
somiaj 2017-02-03 07:58:36
atrigent: it is important that it doesn't, backports packages are not tested as well and have far less quality control, so packages should not be installed from backports unless you explicity ask for it.
atrigent 2017-02-03 07:59:34
is there a way to specify globally that I really want jessie-backports?
atrigent 2017-02-03 07:59:47
since adding it to sources.list apparently isn't enough?
TomTomTo1 2017-02-03 08:00:00
yes, through pinning, but you really don't want to do that.
greycat 2017-02-03 08:00:00
You specify -t jessie-backports on each apt-get command.
somiaj 2017-02-03 08:00:32
atrigent: you don't want jessie-backports packages by default, You only want them on a case by case basis for what you need.
atrigent 2017-02-03 08:00:58
somiaj: that's not actually true, but ok
atrigent 2017-02-03 08:04:04
but, for the sake of argument, let's say you're right and I want to only get openjdk-8-jdk from jessie-backports - do I need to put openjdk-8-jdk in its own apt-get command for this to work? openjdk-8-jdk/jessie-backports has the same issue
somiaj 2017-02-03 08:04:07
atrigent: jessie-backport packages do not have the same security support and do not have nearly the same quality control. So in general installing packages without security support and are not as tested as well should not be the default pinning. You can change this and deal wiht any bugs because of this.
somiaj 2017-02-03 08:04:37
atrigent: when installing jessie-backports packages you should include a -t jessie-backports in the command to ensure the pinning is updated to pull in depends and things from jessie-backports
dontknow 2017-02-03 08:05:03
i set up trim for ssd, added some kernel commands to disable stuff etc in jessie. if i upgraded to testing, would it break my setup?
krokodil 2017-02-03 08:05:24
Hello
somiaj 2017-02-03 08:05:26
dontknow: I don't think so, the mount options/kernel options are still the same afaik.
somiaj 2017-02-03 08:05:41
dontknow: you can double check they are still set, but they should be.
dontknow 2017-02-03 08:05:50
ok
atrigent 2017-02-03 08:06:48
what I REALLY want is for my build to not randomly break when dependencies change
atrigent 2017-02-03 08:06:58
apt-get should either use backports or not
AlexPortable 2017-02-03 08:08:08
How do I export the choices I made in the installer to a preseed file?
somiaj 2017-02-03 08:08:09
atrigent: this is part of the drawback to backports, they are not as well tested.
atrigent 2017-02-03 08:08:22
somiaj: no, this is apt-get's fault
atrigent 2017-02-03 08:08:37
entirely
somiaj 2017-02-03 08:09:05
apt-get is doing what it is supose to via pinning.
atrigent 2017-02-03 08:09:07
it should either completely ignore backports unless your tell it or not ignore it at all
atrigent 2017-02-03 08:09:59
to be able to implicitly install certain backports packages but not implicitly pull in their dependencies is ridiculous
futurama140 2017-02-03 08:10:12
Excuse me, ladies and gentlefops, but I am having a problem that I wish to inquire about with you who know vastly more than me: I am trying to run classiccube (a free opensource minecraft classic) and I am getting errors when trying to use either wine or mono, as the official website stated. It refers me to an error log which I have posted here: http://pastebin.com/GnNMMWJA Can anyone help me interpret my problem and possibly guide m
somiaj 2017-02-03 08:10:24
atrigent: look at the output of apt-cache policy packagename -- this will tell you why apt is choosing the package to install that is
somiaj 2017-02-03 08:10:28
futurama140: please don't cross post
atrigent 2017-02-03 08:11:48
somiaj: do you seriously think this is reasonable behavior?
TomTomTo1 2017-02-03 08:12:42
yes, it just doesn't produce the desired outcome in your particular case.
atrigent 2017-02-03 08:12:44
like, I get that maybe it can't be changed easily now because of backword compatibility, but it's definitely not how things should have been designed initially
atrigent 2017-02-03 08:13:35
TomTomTo1: by "my particular case" you mean "when there are dependencies"?
atrigent 2017-02-03 08:14:45
also, please see this bug: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=851667 for other people complaining about the same issue
judd 2017-02-03 08:14:46
Bug http://bugs.debian.org/851667 in openjdk-8-jre-headless (closed, patch, security): «openjdk-8-jre-headless needs Breaks: ca-certificates-java (<< 20160321~)»; severity: serious; opened: 2017-01-17; last modified: 2017-02-03.
TomTomTo1 2017-02-03 08:15:00
apt is meant to install the highest version of a package in the highest pinned repo that is available. if openjdk-8 is only in jessie-backports (which is intentionally pinned low) but it's dependencies are available in main, it will try to install the dependencies from main. which is what apt is meant to do.
AlexPortable 2017-02-03 08:15:16
How do I export the choices I made in the installer to a preseed file?
atrigent 2017-02-03 08:16:23
TomTomTo1: I understand how it's designed, but that doesn't explain how you can justify this behavior
TomTomTo1 2017-02-03 08:17:37
i want apt to respect the pinning i set.
atrigent 2017-02-03 08:18:20
ok? then why is it installing openjdk-8-jdk, which is from a non-pinned repository?
TomTomTo1 2017-02-03 08:18:42
jessie-backports is pinned, just very low.
TomTomTo1 2017-02-03 08:20:42
but setting Breaks: ca-certificates-java (<< 20160321~) in the control file seems to be a workaround discussed in the bug report you posted. it just takes some time to get into jessie-backports.
atrigent 2017-02-03 08:21:55
...what? no, that's the change that CAUSED this issue
TomTomTo1 2017-02-03 08:22:11
heh, maybe not. whatever. use the -t jessie-backports flag if you need to install something from there. it's really not that big of a deal.
TomTomTo1 2017-02-03 08:22:40
yeah, just read it further.
