Autobuild: Fix broken .deb dependencies / Fix uninstallable 3.8.2 on Ubuntu 18.04 #2423

hoffie · 2022-02-22T23:32:53Z

Short description of changes

The autobuild-produced Debian/Ubuntu packages use another debian/control file than manual builds. This is done by copying a special copy of the control file to the right place.

86807c1 (squash of 3dadf23 and others) from #2138 mistakenly (I think?) removed this logic.

This results in broken dependencies (especially visible on Ubuntu 18.04) and wrong maintainer information:

root@71dafa5ca28f:/downloads# dpkg-deb --info jamulus_headless_3.8.1_ubuntu_amd64.deb | grep -P 'Depends|Maintainer'
 Maintainer: "corrados" <nomail@example.com>
 Depends: libqt5core5a (>= 5.5.0), libqt5network5 (>= 5.0.2), libqt5xml5 (>= 5.0.2)

root@71dafa5ca28f:/downloads# dpkg-deb --info jamulus_headless_3.8.2_ubuntu_amd64.deb | grep -P 'Depends|Maintainer'            
 Maintainer: "Marc Landolt jr" <debian@marclandolt.ch>
 Depends: libc6 (>= 2.27), libgcc-s1 (>= 3.0), libqt5core5a (>= 5.9.0~beta), libqt5network5 (>= 5.8.0), libqt5xml5 (>= 5.0.2), libstdc++6 (>= 7), adduser

We should also decide what to do regarding 3.8.2:

Take the new 3.8.2 .deb (app version remaining at 3.8.2) from this PR, remove the existing .deb from the release and upload the new one (maybe with a -1 suffix to make clear that the file has been updated)
Release 3.8.3 as a bug fix release. Downside: Will trigger irrelevant update notifications and confusion for non Ubuntu-18.04 users
Release 3.8.2.1. Downside: We've never tested this versioning scheme. I wouldn't do that.
Release 3.9.0nightly and point Ubuntu 18.04 users to this version (maybe add hint to the announcement)
Do nothing and state "3.8.2 is broken on Ubuntu 18.04; please use 3.8.1 and wait for the next release". Ubuntu 18.04 is really old, but still supported until 2023. People do use it as Ubuntu 18.04: Version 3.8.2 fails to install due to bad dep libgcc-s1 (>= 3.0) #2422 shows.

I'd tend towards option 1.

Context: Fixes an issue?

Fixes #2422

Does this change need documentation? What needs to be documented and how?

Yes:

Release body
Github Announcement
Facebook announcement

Status of this Pull Request

Needs verification/testing.

What is missing until this pull request can be merged?

Needs verification/testing.

Checklist

I've verified that this Pull Request follows the general code principles
I tested my code and it does what I want
My code follows the style guide
I waited some time after this Pull Request was opened and all GitHub checks completed without errors.
I've filled all the content above

The autobuild-produced Debian/Ubuntu packages use another `debian/control` file than manual builds. This is done by copying a special copy of the `control` file to the right place. 86807c1 mistakenly removed this logic. This results in broken dependencies (especially visible on Ubuntu 18.04) and wrong maintainer information. Fixes jamulussoftware#2422

hoffie · 2022-02-22T23:50:50Z

The deb from https://github.com/hoffie/jamulus/actions/runs/1884500159 (0f9e948) installs for me on Ubuntu 18.04 (should be identical to this PR's artifact). So this PR fixes #2422.
As my PR is based on r3_8_2, this PR's checks will already generate a file which we could use for option (1) mentioned above.

hoffie · 2022-02-22T23:57:02Z

@npostavs If you could have a look here to confirm that the debian/control modification was really an unintended change, this would be highly appreciated. If it was intended we will likely have to find another fix.

hoffie · 2022-02-23T00:48:20Z

As my PR is based on r3_8_2, this PR's checks will already generate a file which we could use for option (1) mentioned above.

Hmm, for some reason¹ the checks in this PR list a totally different commit ID than my branch: https://github.com/jamulussoftware/jamulus/runs/5296375135?check_suite_focus=true

Therefore, we can't use those packages 1:1. This run on my repo/branch would work though: https://github.com/hoffie/jamulus/actions/runs/1884500159

¹ Maybe some auto-rebase by Github?

npostavs · 2022-02-23T03:34:45Z

@npostavs If you could have a look here to confirm that the debian/control modification was really an unintended change, this would be highly appreciated. If it was intended we will likely have to find another fix.

Hmm, I think I copied it from @ann0see's patch in #1767; I agree it looks like a mistake.

ann0see

Yes. Seems like a mistake. I would replace the deb file and give a small announcement

pljones · 2022-02-23T11:03:31Z

Yep, I'd go with "a -1 suffix" -- assuming the default deb didn't have a suffix. Otherwise, increment the suffix.

lwks-12.5.0-amd64.deb would go to lwks-12.5.0-1_amd64.deb for a patch release.
mysql-apt-config_0.3.2-1ubuntu14.04_all.deb would go to mysql-apt-config_0.3.2-2ubuntu14.04_all.deb for the second patch release.

(Why am I keeping ancient .deb files in my Downloads directory..?)

hoffie · 2022-02-23T11:41:27Z

Yep, I'd go with "a -1 suffix" -- assuming the default deb didn't have a suffix. Otherwise, increment the suffix.

If we wanted to do that properly (probably a good idea...), then we'll have to bump debian_revision via an additional changelog entry: https://docs.huihoo.com/debian/manuals/maint-guide/ch-update.en.html#s-newrevision

I can do that on a temporary tag or branch.

pljones · 2022-02-23T15:39:10Z

OK, so:

we need the actual fix merged to master. But that won't create a 3.8.2 release build
we need an "actual" 3.8.2 release build with "_1" appended (in full, something like jamulus_3.8.2_1ubuntu_amd64.deb
that needs building somehow

Then, once it's built, we need the existing 3.8.2 release note updated.

(Should we be using "ubuntu" in the .deb name, by the way?)

Right?

softins

Approving this as the correct fix to master. I think the ChangeLog entry is only needed in master, not for a revised 3.8.2 release, as the bug was just a regression, and there was no intended change from 3.8.1.

Happy just to replace the debs with working ones in the existing release page - both standard and headless. I don't have a strong view about whether to change the filename.

softins · 2022-02-23T16:35:13Z

I've also verified on a new Ubuntu18 VM that the current release debs don't install, and @hoffie's ones from https://github.com/hoffie/jamulus/actions/runs/1884500159 do install fine.

pljones · 2022-02-23T18:50:56Z

Ideally our CI/CD processes would catch things like this as regressions to stop them happening again.

How long would it take to have a step spin up an Ubuntu docker image and install the .deb, checking it (a) installed okay; (b) runs on the default port; (c) a client (inside the container) can connect to it. All headless.

ann0see · 2022-02-23T18:54:30Z

Certainly testing like that is possible. But how would we check this specifically?

pljones · 2022-02-23T18:56:33Z

The deploy would fail. If it fails, it needs fixing. It could fail for many reasons. It could install and still not work, hence the "can a client connect" check. We're not checking a "real" deploy - with firewalls, etc - just a sanity check.

ann0see · 2022-02-23T18:59:08Z

ok. So something like

install .deb file
spin up server (jamulus -n - s -T [other args to check] &)
connect to localhost headless (jamulus -n -c localhost -6 [...])
if exited with non zero exit code: fail ci else (kill after x seconds)

pljones · 2022-02-23T19:10:08Z

Yeah. I don't know how headless client works too well, to be honest - the "zero status code" might be tricky :).

ann0see · 2022-02-23T19:13:28Z

Yes. That’s why a timeout would be good. Or we could abuse json-rpc

pljones · 2022-02-23T19:22:48Z

Or we could abuse json-rpc

Having that in would really help for testing.

hoffie · 2022-02-23T19:37:50Z

@pljones @ann0see I've opened #2428 to track the CI idea.

(Should we be using "ubuntu" in the .deb name, by the way?)

I wondered about that as well. It think it should not. I've opened #2429 for that.

softins · 2022-02-24T10:57:49Z

Certainly testing like that is possible. But how would we check this specifically?

Well this issue was the debs were uninstallable. Since we are building on a fresh ubuntu-18, it should be possible just to try apt install the built debs within the same container, and raise an error if they fail. That would have caught this issue without needing to try running the installed binary.

ann0see · 2022-03-09T21:09:50Z

CHANGELOG: Bug: Fix dependency issue to allow Jamulus being installed on Ubuntu 18.04 (ported from last release to upstream)

ann0see · 2022-07-25T17:26:18Z

@pljones I just shortened the changelog.

pljones · 2022-07-26T06:22:40Z

"(ported from last release to upstream)" is wrong. We don't have an upstream. If someone else who packages our build changes our build, they are downstream of us and we're backporting.

Was this specific to 18.04 (i.e. no earlier or later version)?

ann0see · 2022-07-26T06:28:59Z

I think the issue only appeared on this specific version.
As far as I remember, what really happened was that the release was fixed first and then the fix was applied to master. So it's about our packaging

pljones · 2022-07-26T15:46:47Z

OK. It shouldn't really have been done that way around - it should have been tested on a branch, merged to master, then back ported to created the 3.8.2.1 release...

I'll go with:
Bug Fix: Build: .deb dependency fix to allow Jamulus being installed on Ubuntu 18.04

ann0see · 2022-07-26T15:55:38Z

That’s also ok.

hoffie mentioned this pull request Feb 22, 2022

Ubuntu 18.04: Version 3.8.2 fails to install due to bad dep libgcc-s1 (>= 3.0) #2422

Closed

hoffie requested review from ann0see and softins February 22, 2022 23:54

ann0see approved these changes Feb 23, 2022

View reviewed changes

ann0see added the bug Something isn't working label Feb 23, 2022

softins approved these changes Feb 23, 2022

View reviewed changes

ann0see merged commit 0cb5e26 into jamulussoftware:master Feb 23, 2022

This was referenced Feb 23, 2022

Automatic Client/Server Smoke Test in CI #2428

Open

Releases: Rename .debs (drop _ubuntu_, dash for headless) #2429

Closed

hoffie deleted the autobuild-fix-debian-control branch March 9, 2022 00:13

ann0see added this to the Release 3.9.0 milestone Mar 9, 2022

Autobuild: Fix broken .deb dependencies / Fix uninstallable 3.8.2 on Ubuntu 18.04 #2423

Autobuild: Fix broken .deb dependencies / Fix uninstallable 3.8.2 on Ubuntu 18.04 #2423

Uh oh!

Conversation

hoffie commented Feb 22, 2022 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Checklist

Uh oh!

hoffie commented Feb 22, 2022

Uh oh!

hoffie commented Feb 22, 2022

Uh oh!

hoffie commented Feb 23, 2022

Uh oh!

npostavs commented Feb 23, 2022

Uh oh!

ann0see left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

pljones commented Feb 23, 2022 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

hoffie commented Feb 23, 2022

Uh oh!

pljones commented Feb 23, 2022

Uh oh!

softins left a comment • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

softins commented Feb 23, 2022

Uh oh!

pljones commented Feb 23, 2022 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

ann0see commented Feb 23, 2022

Uh oh!

pljones commented Feb 23, 2022

Uh oh!

ann0see commented Feb 23, 2022

Uh oh!

pljones commented Feb 23, 2022

Uh oh!

ann0see commented Feb 23, 2022

Uh oh!

pljones commented Feb 23, 2022

Uh oh!

hoffie commented Feb 23, 2022

Uh oh!

softins commented Feb 24, 2022

Uh oh!

ann0see commented Mar 9, 2022 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

ann0see commented Jul 25, 2022

Uh oh!

pljones commented Jul 26, 2022 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

ann0see commented Jul 26, 2022

Uh oh!

pljones commented Jul 26, 2022

Uh oh!

ann0see commented Jul 26, 2022

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants

hoffie commented Feb 22, 2022 •

edited

Loading

pljones commented Feb 23, 2022 •

edited

Loading

softins left a comment •

edited

Loading

pljones commented Feb 23, 2022 •

edited

Loading

ann0see commented Mar 9, 2022 •

edited

Loading

pljones commented Jul 26, 2022 •

edited

Loading