Version regressions in cosmic compared to bionic

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
4 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Version regressions in cosmic compared to bionic

Julian Andres Klode
I recently saw some packages in cosmic that have older
versions than the one in bionic, so I wrote a script to
check that, and here are the results.

I think we need to be more careful when it comes to this,
and regressions in security fixes (e.g. having a list
of CVE regressions in devel compared to stable).

The script used for this list is attached, I'd like to polish
it up a bit, add team info, make it generate html and json and
have it run periodically.

Note that the script compares released versions from the
old release to the new release. If there is a newer version
in proposed, it also mentions that, but still lists it.

-- script output:

Version regression support for bionic to cosmic
=====================================================
main
----
ceph                           12.2.7-0ubuntu0.18.04.1/bionic-updates             -> 12.2.4-0ubuntu1.1build1/cosmic           (but 13.2.1+dfsg1-0ubuntu2 in cosmic-proposed)
language-pack-gnome-mai        1:18.04+20180712/bionic-updates                    -> 1:18.04+20180423/cosmic
language-pack-gnome-mai-base   1:18.04+20180712/bionic-updates                    -> 1:18.04+20180423/cosmic
language-pack-mai              1:18.04+20180712/bionic-updates                    -> 1:18.04+20180423/cosmic
language-pack-mai-base         1:18.04+20180712/bionic-updates                    -> 1:18.04+20180423/cosmic
linux-aws                      4.15.0-1023.23/bionic-updates                      -> 4.15.0-1021.21/cosmic                    (but 4.18.0-1001.2 in cosmic-proposed)
linux-gcp                      4.15.0-1021.22/bionic-updates                      -> 4.15.0-1019.20/cosmic                    (but 4.18.0-1001.2 in cosmic-proposed)
linux-meta-aws                 4.15.0.1023.23/bionic-updates                      -> 4.15.0.1021.21/cosmic                    (but 4.18.0.1001.1 in cosmic-proposed)
linux-meta-gcp                 4.15.0.1021.23/bionic-updates                      -> 4.15.0.1019.21/cosmic                    (but 4.18.0.1001.1 in cosmic-proposed)
linux-signed-gcp               4.15.0-1021.22/bionic-updates                      -> 4.15.0-1019.20/cosmic                    (but 4.18.0-1001.2 in cosmic-proposed)
thunderbird                    1:52.9.1+build3-0ubuntu0.18.04.1/bionic-updates    -> 1:52.7.0+build1-0ubuntu1/cosmic
woff2                          1.0.2-1build0.1/bionic-updates                     -> 1.0.2-1/cosmic

restricted
----------

universe
--------
mariadb-10.1                   1:10.1.34-0ubuntu0.18.04.1/bionic-updates          -> 1:10.1.29-6ubuntu2/cosmic                (but 1:10.1.35-1ubuntu1 in cosmic-proposed)
snapcraft                      2.43.1+18.04/bionic-updates                        -> 2.43+18.10.1/cosmic                      (but 2.43.1+18.10 in cosmic-proposed)
swauth                         1.3.0-1ubuntu1/bionic-updates                      -> 1.3.0-1/cosmic

multiverse
----------



--
debian developer - deb.li/jak | jak-linux.org - free software dev
ubuntu core developer                              i speak de, en

--
ubuntu-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel

version-regressions.py (1K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Version regressions in cosmic compared to bionic

Julian Andres Klode
On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 02:13:21PM +0200, Julian Andres Klode wrote:
> I recently saw some packages in cosmic that have older
> versions than the one in bionic, so I wrote a script to
> check that, and here are the results.

Some more historic results (xenial->bionic, xenial->cosmic,
trusty->xenial (good), trusty->cosmic).

Version regression support for xenial to bionic
=====================================================
main
----
crash                          7.2.3+real-1~16.04.1/xenial-updates                -> 7.2.1-1/bionic                          
linux-meta-azure               4.15.0.1023.29/xenial-security                     -> 4.15.0.1023.23/bionic-security           (but 4.15.0.1025.25 in bionic-proposed)
linux-meta-gcp                 4.15.0.1021.35/xenial-security                     -> 4.15.0.1021.23/bionic-security           (but 4.15.0.1022.24 in bionic-proposed)

restricted
----------

universe
--------
fuse-umfuse-ext2               0.4-1.1ubuntu0.16.04.1/xenial-updates              -> 0.4-1.1ubuntu0.1/bionic                

multiverse
----------


Version regression support for xenial to cosmic
=====================================================
main
----
linux-gcp                      4.15.0-1021.22~16.04.1/xenial-updates              -> 4.15.0-1019.20/cosmic                    (but 4.18.0-1001.2 in cosmic-proposed)
linux-meta-azure               4.15.0.1023.29/xenial-updates                      -> 4.15.0.1023.23/cosmic                    (but 4.18.0.1002.2 in cosmic-proposed)
linux-meta-gcp                 4.15.0.1021.35/xenial-updates                      -> 4.15.0.1019.21/cosmic                    (but 4.18.0.1001.1 in cosmic-proposed)
linux-signed-gcp               4.15.0-1021.22~16.04.1/xenial-updates              -> 4.15.0-1019.20/cosmic                    (but 4.18.0-1001.2 in cosmic-proposed)
thunderbird                    1:52.9.1+build3-0ubuntu0.16.04.1/xenial-updates    -> 1:52.7.0+build1-0ubuntu1/cosmic        

restricted
----------

universe
--------
fuse-umfuse-ext2               0.4-1.1ubuntu0.16.04.1/xenial-updates              -> 0.4-1.1ubuntu0.1/cosmic                
snapcraft                      2.43.1/xenial-updates                              -> 2.43+18.10.1/cosmic                      (but 2.43.1+18.10 in cosmic-proposed)

multiverse
----------

Version regression support for trusty to xenial
=====================================================
main
----

restricted
----------

universe
--------

multiverse
----------


Version regression support for trusty to cosmic
=====================================================
main
----
thunderbird                    1:52.9.1+build3-0ubuntu0.14.04.1/trusty-updates    -> 1:52.7.0+build1-0ubuntu1/cosmic        

restricted
----------

universe
--------
fuse-umfuse-ext2               0.4-1.1ubuntu0.14.04.1/trusty-updates              -> 0.4-1.1ubuntu0.1/cosmic                

multiverse
----------



--
debian developer - deb.li/jak | jak-linux.org - free software dev
ubuntu core developer                              i speak de, en

--
ubuntu-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Version regressions in cosmic compared to bionic

Gunnar Hjalmarsson
In reply to this post by Julian Andres Klode
On 2018-10-10 14:13, Julian Andres Klode wrote:
> language-pack-gnome-mai        1:18.04+20180712/bionic-updates                    -> 1:18.04+20180423/cosmic
> language-pack-gnome-mai-base   1:18.04+20180712/bionic-updates                    -> 1:18.04+20180423/cosmic
> language-pack-mai              1:18.04+20180712/bionic-updates                    -> 1:18.04+20180423/cosmic
> language-pack-mai-base         1:18.04+20180712/bionic-updates                    -> 1:18.04+20180423/cosmic

Maithili is a language which is not so well translated in Ubuntu. When
building language packs, a threshold is applied to exclude languages
with poor translation coverage. Apparently enough strings are translated
in bionic, but not (yet) in cosmic.

Łukasz is about to build new language packs. If the Maithili langpacks
are updated then, all is well. Otherwise it would be most consistent,
AFAICT, to drop the Maithili language packs from the cosmic archive.

--
Gunnar Hjalmarsson
https://launchpad.net/~gunnarhj

--
ubuntu-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Version regressions in cosmic compared to bionic

Steve Langasek-6
On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 04:28:57PM +0200, Gunnar Hjalmarsson wrote:
> On 2018-10-10 14:13, Julian Andres Klode wrote:
> > language-pack-gnome-mai        1:18.04+20180712/bionic-updates                    -> 1:18.04+20180423/cosmic
> > language-pack-gnome-mai-base   1:18.04+20180712/bionic-updates                    -> 1:18.04+20180423/cosmic
> > language-pack-mai              1:18.04+20180712/bionic-updates                    -> 1:18.04+20180423/cosmic
> > language-pack-mai-base         1:18.04+20180712/bionic-updates                    -> 1:18.04+20180423/cosmic

> Maithili is a language which is not so well translated in Ubuntu. When
> building language packs, a threshold is applied to exclude languages with
> poor translation coverage. Apparently enough strings are translated in
> bionic, but not (yet) in cosmic.

> Łukasz is about to build new language packs. If the Maithili langpacks are
> updated then, all is well. Otherwise it would be most consistent, AFAICT, to
> drop the Maithili language packs from the cosmic archive.

We should just remove those packages now just in case, and if they are
reintroduced in the next export that's fine.  I've done this now.

--
Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer                                   https://www.debian.org/
[hidden email]                                     [hidden email]

--
ubuntu-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel

signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment