* base-files: /etc/os-release should contain VERSION variables for testing and unstable
@ 2022-10-03 9:55 ` Sedat Dilek
2022-10-03 21:47 ` Bug#1008735: " Santiago Vila
2022-10-13 14:02 ` Masahiro Yamada
0 siblings, 2 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Sedat Dilek @ 2022-10-03 9:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 1008735, Gioele Barabucci
Cc: Masahiro Yamada, Nick Desaulniers, Michal Marek, linux-kbuild
[ CC linux-kbuild folks (see [0] ]
Hi,
I am using Debian/unstable AMD64 and doing Linux-kernel upstream
development and testing.
People using bindeb-pkg (mkdebian) from Linux-kernel sources
(scripts/packages) to build and test their selfmade Debian kernels get
a now a "n/a" for distribution.
Background (see [1]):
[ scripts/package/mkdebian ]
# Try to determine distribution
if [ -n "$KDEB_CHANGELOG_DIST" ]; then
distribution=$KDEB_CHANGELOG_DIST
# In some cases lsb_release returns the codename as n/a, which breaks
dpkg-parsechangelog
elif distribution=$(lsb_release -cs 2>/dev/null) && [ -n
"$distribution" ] && [ "$distribution" != "n/a" ]; then
: # nothing to do in this case
else
distribution="unstable"
echo >&2 "Using default distribution of 'unstable' in the changelog"
echo >&2 "Install lsb-release or set \$KDEB_CHANGELOG_DIST explicitly"
fi
Personally, I set hardcoded in my kernel build-script as a workaround:
distribution="bookworm"
Gioele suggested me to enrich /etc/os-release with:
VERSION_ID=unstable <--- XXX: I prefer sid because of PRETTY_NAME and
it's shorter
VERSION_CODENAME=bookworm
In the end the file looks like:
PRETTY_NAME="Debian GNU/Linux bookworm/sid"
NAME="Debian GNU/Linux"
ID=debian
VERSION_ID=sid
VERSION_CODENAME=bookworm
HOME_URL="https://www.debian.org/"
SUPPORT_URL="https://www.debian.org/support"
BUG_REPORT_URL="https://bugs.debian.org/"
...and this seems to work:
# lsb_release -cs
No LSB modules are available.
bookworm
Please, provide a solution not to break workflows that were successful
for years.
Thanks.
Best regards,
-Sedat-
[0] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/MAINTAINERS#n11005
[1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/scripts/package/mkdebian#n123
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: Bug#1008735: base-files: /etc/os-release should contain VERSION variables for testing and unstable
2022-10-03 9:55 ` base-files: /etc/os-release should contain VERSION variables for testing and unstable Sedat Dilek
@ 2022-10-03 21:47 ` Santiago Vila
2022-10-13 14:02 ` Masahiro Yamada
1 sibling, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Santiago Vila @ 2022-10-03 21:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: sedat.dilek, 1008735, Gioele Barabucci
Cc: Masahiro Yamada, Nick Desaulniers, Michal Marek, linux-kbuild
El 3/10/22 a las 11:55, Sedat Dilek escribió:
> VERSION_ID=sid
> VERSION_CODENAME=bookworm
This is "schizophrenic", so to speak, and I don't think it is a good idea.
I've simply added VERSION_CODENAME=bookworm.
The only caveat is that testing and unstable are sides of the same coin,
but this is already explained in /usr/share/doc/base-files/FAQ.
As a result, if you take the VERSION_CODENAME string and include it in a
kernel version string somewhere, the meaning of such string is that the
kernel image was created in either a bookworm or a sid distribution.
I think this is good enough for most purposes. If you need more
fine-tuning, somebody should investigate what kind of magic lsb_release
did in the past and reenable part of it.
Thanks.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: base-files: /etc/os-release should contain VERSION variables for testing and unstable
2022-10-03 9:55 ` base-files: /etc/os-release should contain VERSION variables for testing and unstable Sedat Dilek
2022-10-03 21:47 ` Bug#1008735: " Santiago Vila
@ 2022-10-13 14:02 ` Masahiro Yamada
2022-10-13 22:08 ` Sedat Dilek
2022-10-14 10:10 ` Gioele Barabucci
1 sibling, 2 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Masahiro Yamada @ 2022-10-13 14:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: sedat.dilek
Cc: 1008735, Gioele Barabucci, Nick Desaulniers, Michal Marek, linux-kbuild
Hi Sedat,
Sorry for my late replay.
On Mon, Oct 3, 2022 at 6:56 PM Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> [ CC linux-kbuild folks (see [0] ]
Can you give me more context of this email?
> Hi,
>
> I am using Debian/unstable AMD64 and doing Linux-kernel upstream
> development and testing.
>
> People using bindeb-pkg (mkdebian) from Linux-kernel sources
> (scripts/packages) to build and test their selfmade Debian kernels get
> a now a "n/a" for distribution.
Right, if I try the latest sid,
"lsb_release -cs" returns "n/a".
It returned "sid" before IIRC.
What was changed in Debian?
Any change in the lsb_release program?
>
> Background (see [1]):
>
> [ scripts/package/mkdebian ]
>
> # Try to determine distribution
> if [ -n "$KDEB_CHANGELOG_DIST" ]; then
> distribution=$KDEB_CHANGELOG_DIST
> # In some cases lsb_release returns the codename as n/a, which breaks
> dpkg-parsechangelog
> elif distribution=$(lsb_release -cs 2>/dev/null) && [ -n
> "$distribution" ] && [ "$distribution" != "n/a" ]; then
> : # nothing to do in this case
> else
> distribution="unstable"
> echo >&2 "Using default distribution of 'unstable' in the changelog"
> echo >&2 "Install lsb-release or set \$KDEB_CHANGELOG_DIST explicitly"
> fi
>
> Personally, I set hardcoded in my kernel build-script as a workaround:
>
> distribution="bookworm"
>
> Gioele suggested me to enrich /etc/os-release with:
>
> VERSION_ID=unstable <--- XXX: I prefer sid because of PRETTY_NAME and
> it's shorter
> VERSION_CODENAME=bookworm
>
> In the end the file looks like:
>
> PRETTY_NAME="Debian GNU/Linux bookworm/sid"
> NAME="Debian GNU/Linux"
> ID=debian
> VERSION_ID=sid
> VERSION_CODENAME=bookworm
> HOME_URL="https://www.debian.org/"
> SUPPORT_URL="https://www.debian.org/support"
> BUG_REPORT_URL="https://bugs.debian.org/"
>
> ...and this seems to work:
>
> # lsb_release -cs
> No LSB modules are available.
> bookworm
>
> Please, provide a solution not to break workflows that were successful
> for years.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Best regards,
> -Sedat-
>
> [0] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/MAINTAINERS#n11005
> [1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/scripts/package/mkdebian#n123
--
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: base-files: /etc/os-release should contain VERSION variables for testing and unstable
2022-10-13 14:02 ` Masahiro Yamada
@ 2022-10-13 22:08 ` Sedat Dilek
2022-10-14 10:10 ` Gioele Barabucci
1 sibling, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Sedat Dilek @ 2022-10-13 22:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Masahiro Yamada
Cc: 1008735, Gioele Barabucci, Nick Desaulniers, Michal Marek, linux-kbuild
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4409 bytes --]
On Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 4:03 PM Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Sedat,
>
> Sorry for my late replay.
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 3, 2022 at 6:56 PM Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > [ CC linux-kbuild folks (see [0] ]
>
>
>
> Can you give me more context of this email?
>
>
>
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I am using Debian/unstable AMD64 and doing Linux-kernel upstream
> > development and testing.
> >
> > People using bindeb-pkg (mkdebian) from Linux-kernel sources
> > (scripts/packages) to build and test their selfmade Debian kernels get
> > a now a "n/a" for distribution.
>
>
>
> Right, if I try the latest sid,
> "lsb_release -cs" returns "n/a".
> It returned "sid" before IIRC.
>
>
> What was changed in Debian?
> Any change in the lsb_release program?
>
Hi Masahiro San,
The Debian maintainer(s) changed the co-working of these packages:
root# dpkg -l | egrep 'base-files|lsb-release' | awk '/^ii/ {print $1
" " $2 " " $3}' | column -t
ii base-files 12.3
ii lsb-release 12.0-1
ii lsb-release-minimal 12.0-1
My findings:
First, /usr/bin/lsb_release-11.4 (python) VS.
/usr/bin/lsb_release-12.0 (shell) - both files attached.
Second, version 12.0 checks now explicitly for values in /etc/os-release.
As a side note: All these changes were not mentioned in lsb-release
debian/changelog.
The easiest way to fix this is to add...
VERSION_ID=sid (or unstable)
...to /etc/os-release file.
Just for the sake of technical correctness:
"sid" or "unstable" is not a numerical value - it's a string.
In version 12.3 of base-files "VERSION_CODENAME=bookworm" was added on
users' request.
Last checks:
Original (base-files version 12.0):
[ /etc/os-release ]
PRETTY_NAME="Debian GNU/Linux bookworm/sid"
NAME="Debian GNU/Linux"
VERSION_CODENAME=bookworm
ID=debian
HOME_URL="https://www.debian.org/"
SUPPORT_URL="https://www.debian.org/support"
BUG_REPORT_URL="https://bugs.debian.org/"
root# lsb_release --all
No LSB modules are available.
Distributor ID: Debian
Description: Debian GNU/Linux bookworm/sid
Release: n/a
Codename: bookworm
Modified:
[ /etc/os-release ]
PRETTY_NAME="Debian GNU/Linux bookworm/sid"
NAME="Debian GNU/Linux"
VERSION_CODENAME=bookworm
VERSION_ID=sid
ID=debian
HOME_URL="https://www.debian.org/"
SUPPORT_URL="https://www.debian.org/support"
BUG_REPORT_URL="https://bugs.debian.org/"
root# lsb_release --all
No LSB modules are available.
Distributor ID: Debian
Description: Debian GNU/Linux bookworm/sid
Release: sid
Codename: bookworm
More comments see https://bugs.debian.org/1008735.
-Sedat-
>
>
>
>
>
> >
> > Background (see [1]):
> >
> > [ scripts/package/mkdebian ]
> >
> > # Try to determine distribution
> > if [ -n "$KDEB_CHANGELOG_DIST" ]; then
> > distribution=$KDEB_CHANGELOG_DIST
> > # In some cases lsb_release returns the codename as n/a, which breaks
> > dpkg-parsechangelog
> > elif distribution=$(lsb_release -cs 2>/dev/null) && [ -n
> > "$distribution" ] && [ "$distribution" != "n/a" ]; then
> > : # nothing to do in this case
> > else
> > distribution="unstable"
> > echo >&2 "Using default distribution of 'unstable' in the changelog"
> > echo >&2 "Install lsb-release or set \$KDEB_CHANGELOG_DIST explicitly"
> > fi
> >
> > Personally, I set hardcoded in my kernel build-script as a workaround:
> >
> > distribution="bookworm"
> >
> > Gioele suggested me to enrich /etc/os-release with:
> >
> > VERSION_ID=unstable <--- XXX: I prefer sid because of PRETTY_NAME and
> > it's shorter
> > VERSION_CODENAME=bookworm
> >
> > In the end the file looks like:
> >
> > PRETTY_NAME="Debian GNU/Linux bookworm/sid"
> > NAME="Debian GNU/Linux"
> > ID=debian
> > VERSION_ID=sid
> > VERSION_CODENAME=bookworm
> > HOME_URL="https://www.debian.org/"
> > SUPPORT_URL="https://www.debian.org/support"
> > BUG_REPORT_URL="https://bugs.debian.org/"
> >
> > ...and this seems to work:
> >
> > # lsb_release -cs
> > No LSB modules are available.
> > bookworm
> >
> > Please, provide a solution not to break workflows that were successful
> > for years.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > -Sedat-
> >
> > [0] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/MAINTAINERS#n11005
> > [1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/scripts/package/mkdebian#n123
>
>
>
> --
> Best Regards
> Masahiro Yamada
[-- Attachment #2: lsb_release-11.4 --]
[-- Type: application/x-troff-man, Size: 3638 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #3: lsb_release-12.0 --]
[-- Type: application/octet-stream, Size: 2651 bytes --]
#!/bin/sh
# SPDX-FileCopyrightText: 2021-2022 Gioele Barabucci
# SPDX-License-Identifier: ISC
set -eu
export LC_ALL="C.UTF-8"
help () {
cat <<-EOD
Usage: lsb_release [options]
Options:
-h, --help show this help message and exit
-v, --version show LSB modules this system supports
-i, --id show distributor ID
-d, --description show description of this distribution
-r, --release show release number of this distribution
-c, --codename show code name of this distribution
-a, --all show all of the above information
-s, --short show requested information in short format
EOD
exit
}
show_id=false
show_desc=false
show_release=false
show_codename=false
short_format=false
options=$(getopt --name lsb_release -o hvidrcas -l help,version,id,description,release,codename,all,short -- "$@") || exit 2
eval set -- "$options"
while [ $# -gt 0 ] ; do
case "$1" in
-h|--help) help ;;
-v|--version) ;;
-i|--id) show_id=true ;;
-d|--description) show_desc=true ;;
-r|--release) show_release=true ;;
-c|--codename) show_codename=true ;;
-a|--all) show_id=true ; show_desc=true ; show_release=true ; show_codename=true ;;
-s|--short) short_format=true ;;
*) break ;;
esac
shift
done
display_line () {
label="$1"
value="$2"
if $short_format ; then
printf "%s\n" "$value"
else
printf "%s:\t%s\n" "$label" "$value"
fi
}
# Load release info from standard identification data files
[ -f /usr/lib/os-release ] && os_release=/usr/lib/os-release
[ -f /etc/os-release ] && os_release=/etc/os-release
[ "${LSB_OS_RELEASE-x}" != "x" ] && [ -f "$LSB_OS_RELEASE" ] && os_release="$LSB_OS_RELEASE"
[ "${os_release-x}" != "x" ] && . "$os_release"
# Mimic the output of Debian's Python-based lsb_release
# Capitalize ID
: "${ID=}"
ID="$(printf "%s" "$ID" | cut -c1 | tr '[:lower:]' '[:upper:]')$(printf "%s" "$ID" | cut -c2-)"
# Use NAME if set and different from ID only in capitalization.
if [ "${NAME-x}" != "x" ] ; then
lower_case_id=$(printf "%s" "$ID" | tr '[:upper:]' '[:lower:]')
lower_case_name=$(printf "%s" "$NAME" | tr '[:upper:]' '[:lower:]')
if [ "${lower_case_id}" = "${lower_case_name}" ] ; then
ID="$NAME"
fi
fi
# Generate minimal standard-conform output (if stdout is a TTY).
[ -t 1 ] && echo "No LSB modules are available." >& 2
if $show_id ; then
display_line "Distributor ID" "${ID:-n/a}"
fi
if $show_desc ; then
display_line "Description" "${PRETTY_NAME:-n/a}"
fi
if $show_release ; then
display_line "Release" "${VERSION_ID:-n/a}"
fi
if $show_codename ; then
display_line "Codename" "${VERSION_CODENAME:-n/a}"
fi
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: base-files: /etc/os-release should contain VERSION variables for testing and unstable
2022-10-13 14:02 ` Masahiro Yamada
2022-10-13 22:08 ` Sedat Dilek
@ 2022-10-14 10:10 ` Gioele Barabucci
2022-10-14 19:58 ` Masahiro Yamada
2022-10-15 8:56 ` Sedat Dilek
1 sibling, 2 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Gioele Barabucci @ 2022-10-14 10:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Masahiro Yamada, sedat.dilek; +Cc: Nick Desaulniers, Michal Marek, linux-kbuild
Dear Masahiro, dear Sedat,
[Debian bug #1008735 removed from CC]
On 13/10/22 16:02, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 3, 2022 at 6:56 PM Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Can you give me more context of this email?
>
>> I am using Debian/unstable AMD64 and doing Linux-kernel upstream
>> development and testing.
>>
>> People using bindeb-pkg (mkdebian) from Linux-kernel sources
>> (scripts/packages) to build and test their selfmade Debian kernels get
>> a now a "n/a" for distribution.
>
> Right, if I try the latest sid,
> "lsb_release -cs" returns "n/a".
> It returned "sid" before IIRC.
>
> What was changed in Debian?
> Any change in the lsb_release program?
A quick summary from the upstream developer (me) of the new
`lsb_release` implementation being rolled out in Debian.
Debian dropped the legacy `lsb_release` package. Now the `lsb_release`
command is provided by `lsb-release-minimal`.
`lsb-release-minimal` relies on `/etc/os-release` to provide LSB
information in a format that is byte-for-byte compatible with the
`lsb_release` specifications.
The issue you experienced is due to Debian's `/etc/os-release` (provided
by the `base-files` package) not contain all the necessary information.
See <https://bugs.debian.org/1008735>.
The situation is now changing. The maintainer of `base-files` has added
VERSION_CODENAME ("bookworm" for both unstable and testing).
However VERSION_ID (used for `lsb_release --release`) has not been added
yet. This is being tracked at <https://bugs.debian.org/1021663>.
Until #1021663 is fixed, `lsb_release -rc` will return the following
info in both unstable and testing.
Release: n/a
Codename: bookworm
A workaround to get the old behavior is:
rm /etc/os-release
cp /usr/lib/os-release /etc/os-release
echo "VERSION_ID=unstable" >> /etc/os-release
echo "VERSION_CODENAME=sid" >> /etc/os-release
Regards,
--
Gioele Barabucci
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: base-files: /etc/os-release should contain VERSION variables for testing and unstable
2022-10-14 10:10 ` Gioele Barabucci
@ 2022-10-14 19:58 ` Masahiro Yamada
2022-10-15 8:56 ` Sedat Dilek
1 sibling, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Masahiro Yamada @ 2022-10-14 19:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Gioele Barabucci
Cc: sedat.dilek, Nick Desaulniers, Michal Marek, linux-kbuild
On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 7:10 PM Gioele Barabucci <gioele@svario.it> wrote:
>
> Dear Masahiro, dear Sedat,
>
> [Debian bug #1008735 removed from CC]
>
> On 13/10/22 16:02, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 3, 2022 at 6:56 PM Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Can you give me more context of this email?
> >
> >> I am using Debian/unstable AMD64 and doing Linux-kernel upstream
> >> development and testing.
> >>
> >> People using bindeb-pkg (mkdebian) from Linux-kernel sources
> >> (scripts/packages) to build and test their selfmade Debian kernels get
> >> a now a "n/a" for distribution.
> >
> > Right, if I try the latest sid,
> > "lsb_release -cs" returns "n/a".
> > It returned "sid" before IIRC.
> >
> > What was changed in Debian?
> > Any change in the lsb_release program?
>
>
> A quick summary from the upstream developer (me) of the new
> `lsb_release` implementation being rolled out in Debian.
>
> Debian dropped the legacy `lsb_release` package. Now the `lsb_release`
> command is provided by `lsb-release-minimal`.
>
> `lsb-release-minimal` relies on `/etc/os-release` to provide LSB
> information in a format that is byte-for-byte compatible with the
> `lsb_release` specifications.
>
> The issue you experienced is due to Debian's `/etc/os-release` (provided
> by the `base-files` package) not contain all the necessary information.
> See <https://bugs.debian.org/1008735>.
>
> The situation is now changing. The maintainer of `base-files` has added
> VERSION_CODENAME ("bookworm" for both unstable and testing).
>
> However VERSION_ID (used for `lsb_release --release`) has not been added
> yet. This is being tracked at <https://bugs.debian.org/1021663>.
>
> Until #1021663 is fixed, `lsb_release -rc` will return the following
> info in both unstable and testing.
>
> Release: n/a
> Codename: bookworm
Thanks for the pointer.
It sounds reasonable.
Also, it was good to know that no action is needed
for the kernel tree.
Thanks.
>
> A workaround to get the old behavior is:
>
> rm /etc/os-release
> cp /usr/lib/os-release /etc/os-release
> echo "VERSION_ID=unstable" >> /etc/os-release
> echo "VERSION_CODENAME=sid" >> /etc/os-release
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> Gioele Barabucci
--
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: base-files: /etc/os-release should contain VERSION variables for testing and unstable
2022-10-14 10:10 ` Gioele Barabucci
2022-10-14 19:58 ` Masahiro Yamada
@ 2022-10-15 8:56 ` Sedat Dilek
2022-10-15 15:45 ` Gioele Barabucci
1 sibling, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Sedat Dilek @ 2022-10-15 8:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Gioele Barabucci
Cc: Masahiro Yamada, Nick Desaulniers, Michal Marek, linux-kbuild
On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 12:10 PM Gioele Barabucci <gioele@svario.it> wrote:
>
> Dear Masahiro, dear Sedat,
>
> [Debian bug #1008735 removed from CC]
>
> On 13/10/22 16:02, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 3, 2022 at 6:56 PM Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Can you give me more context of this email?
> >
> >> I am using Debian/unstable AMD64 and doing Linux-kernel upstream
> >> development and testing.
> >>
> >> People using bindeb-pkg (mkdebian) from Linux-kernel sources
> >> (scripts/packages) to build and test their selfmade Debian kernels get
> >> a now a "n/a" for distribution.
> >
> > Right, if I try the latest sid,
> > "lsb_release -cs" returns "n/a".
> > It returned "sid" before IIRC.
> >
> > What was changed in Debian?
> > Any change in the lsb_release program?
>
>
> A quick summary from the upstream developer (me) of the new
> `lsb_release` implementation being rolled out in Debian.
>
> Debian dropped the legacy `lsb_release` package. Now the `lsb_release`
> command is provided by `lsb-release-minimal`.
>
> `lsb-release-minimal` relies on `/etc/os-release` to provide LSB
> information in a format that is byte-for-byte compatible with the
> `lsb_release` specifications.
>
> The issue you experienced is due to Debian's `/etc/os-release` (provided
> by the `base-files` package) not contain all the necessary information.
> See <https://bugs.debian.org/1008735>.
>
> The situation is now changing. The maintainer of `base-files` has added
> VERSION_CODENAME ("bookworm" for both unstable and testing).
>
> However VERSION_ID (used for `lsb_release --release`) has not been added
> yet. This is being tracked at <https://bugs.debian.org/1021663>.
>
> Until #1021663 is fixed, `lsb_release -rc` will return the following
> info in both unstable and testing.
>
> Release: n/a
> Codename: bookworm
>
> A workaround to get the old behavior is:
>
> rm /etc/os-release
> cp /usr/lib/os-release /etc/os-release
> echo "VERSION_ID=unstable" >> /etc/os-release
> echo "VERSION_CODENAME=sid" >> /etc/os-release
>
Thanks for your clarifications and information.
Adding your workaround (with which I agree and looks sane to me):
I still see some issues:
# lsb_release --all 2>/dev/null
Distributor ID: Debian
Description: Debian GNU/Linux bookworm/sid
Release: unstable
Codename: sid
# lsb_release --codename --short 2>/dev/null
sid
I bet we need to change PRETTY_NAME as well and...
# cat /etc/os-release
PRETTY_NAME="Debian GNU/Linux bookworm/sid"
NAME="Debian GNU/Linux"
ID=debian
VERSION_ID=unstable
VERSION_CODENAME=sid
HOME_URL="https://www.debian.org/"
SUPPORT_URL="https://www.debian.org/support"
BUG_REPORT_URL="https://bugs.debian.org/"
( For Debian/testing "testing" and "bookworm" sounds reasonable to me
(see Debian Bug #1021663). )
( Guess Debian/stable then should contain "stable" and "buster"? )
...who cares about?
# cat /etc/debian_version
bookworm/sid
I am a long user of Debian/unstable AMD64 and I was seeing on boot,
background of graphical login-manager and/or any info-tool like
KDE/kinfocenter etc.
Debian GNU/Linux $codename_of_current_testing/sid (current: bookworm/sid)
When you want to change all that "old behaviour" then do it for all
releases available on Debian, please.
-Sedat-
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: base-files: /etc/os-release should contain VERSION variables for testing and unstable
2022-10-15 8:56 ` Sedat Dilek
@ 2022-10-15 15:45 ` Gioele Barabucci
0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Gioele Barabucci @ 2022-10-15 15:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: sedat.dilek; +Cc: Masahiro Yamada, Nick Desaulniers, Michal Marek, linux-kbuild
On 15/10/22 10:56, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> # lsb_release --all 2>/dev/null
> Distributor ID: Debian
> Description: Debian GNU/Linux bookworm/sid
> Release: unstable
> Codename: sid
>
> [...]
>
> ( Guess Debian/stable then should contain "stable" and "buster"? )
Stable currently says "Release: 11.5" and "Codename: bullseye" (that's
the normal behavior for stable releases).
--
Gioele Barabucci
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2022-10-15 15:45 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <164872694772.208797.12124885046362540124.reportbug@drop.zugschlus.de>
2022-10-03 9:55 ` base-files: /etc/os-release should contain VERSION variables for testing and unstable Sedat Dilek
2022-10-03 21:47 ` Bug#1008735: " Santiago Vila
2022-10-13 14:02 ` Masahiro Yamada
2022-10-13 22:08 ` Sedat Dilek
2022-10-14 10:10 ` Gioele Barabucci
2022-10-14 19:58 ` Masahiro Yamada
2022-10-15 8:56 ` Sedat Dilek
2022-10-15 15:45 ` Gioele Barabucci
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.