deal with landscape repositories during upgrade

[Andreas Hasenack]

Binary package hint: update-manager-core

The official Landscape repositories are considered third party ones and are disabled during a distribution upgrade.

TEST CASE:
0. install gutsy
1. add "deb http://landscape.canonical.com/packages/gutsy ./" to /etc/apt/sources.list
2. run update-manager and click on "upgrade"
3. verify that update-manager tells you that third party repository have been disabled, check /etc/apt/sources.list when the dialog is displayed and confirm that a "#" is in front of the landscape.canonical.com line
4. cancel the upgrade

5. run "update-manager --proposed" and click on "upgrade"
6. verify that no message about third party sources is displayed and check that /etc/apt/sources.list contains a "http://landscape.canonical.com/packages/hardy" line instead
7. ignore the error about the authentication failure, that is because this test here has not added the required repository key

Their format is:

deb http://landscape.canonical.com/packages/<distroname> ./

We currently support all distros from dapper to hardy, so the possibilities for sources.list entries are:
deb http://landscape.canonical.com/packages/dapper ./
deb http://landscape.canonical.com/packages/edgy ./
deb http://landscape.canonical.com/packages/feisty ./
deb http://landscape.canonical.com/packages/gutsy ./
deb http://landscape.canonical.com/packages/hardy ./

So, after a gutsy -> hardy upgrade, this line:
deb http://landscape.canonical.com/packages/gutsy ./

should be changed to:
deb http://landscape.canonical.com/packages/hardy ./

and the packages from that repo upgraded too as usual so we end up with landscape related packages built for hardy.

[Michael Vogt (mvo)]

This is fixed in my local bzr tree and will be part of the next upload.

[Steve Langasek (vorlon)]

accepted into hardy-proposed.

[Andreas Hasenack (ahasenack)]

Will this updated package also be released for dapper? Can I grab it for testing from somewhere?

[Martin Pitt (pitti)]

Hm, I created a dapper task, but on second thought, do we need that at all? I thought when you do an upgrade from release A to release B, this would first download upgrade-manager from release B instead of using the old one in A. Thus, if it is fixed in hardy, upgrades from both dapper and gutsy should work fine? Michael, can you please give your guru answer? Thanks!

[Martin Pitt (pitti)]

Although not all fixed bugs have been verified, four tests from Brian showed that update-manager is still able to upgrade from dapper and gutsy, and fixed some bugs. Due to the urgency of some bugs I have copied this to hardy-updates now.

[Andreas Hasenack (ahasenack)]

FWIW, I tested a dapper -> hardy upgrade using the "-p hardy" parameter, and the landscape bits were handled correctly.

[Martin Pitt (pitti)]

This was fixed in the hardy upgrader, and does not affect the upgrader in dapper.

[Andreas Hasenack (ahasenack)]

Well, *shouldn't* it affect the upgrader in dapper? How else will people upgrade correctly from dapper to hardy? Using "-p hardy" seems a workaround.

[Martin Pitt (pitti)]

Andreas Hasenack [2008-05-21 14:02 -0000]:
> Well, *shouldn't* it affect the upgrader in dapper? How else will people
> upgrade correctly from dapper to hardy? Using "-p hardy" seems a
> workaround.

As far as I know, an upgrade from release A to release B uses the
update-manager from release B (i. e. A's version downloads B and runs
that). Michael, can you please confirm that?

Thanks,

Martin
--
Martin Pitt | http://www.piware.de
Ubuntu Developer (www.ubuntu.com) | Debian Developer (www.debian.org)

[Michael Vogt (mvo)]

Dapper will download the upgrader from hardy to perform the upgrade. So this case should work fine now. The fix is now in hardy-updates so it is used by default.

Before it was in hardy-updates it was required to use "-p" (--proposed) to get the proposed version of the upgrade.

Cheers,
 Michael

[Andreas Hasenack (ahasenack)]

The upgrade from dapper to hardy using "do-release-upgrade -d" worked just fine regarding landscape. Just "do-release-upgrade" doesn't yet recognize hardy as an upgrade, but that's a different matter that is being addressed elsewhere.

Thanks!

P.S.: am I supposed to remove the "verification-needed" tag now or is that about something else?

[Andreas Hasenack (ahasenack)]

It's happening again. This time, with hardy -> intrepid upgrade.

# do-release-upgrade -d
Checking for a new ubuntu release
Done Upgrade tool signature
Done Upgrade tool
Done downloading
extracting 'intrepid.tar.gz'
authenticate 'intrepid.tar.gz' against 'intrepid.tar.gz.gpg'

(...)
Third party sources disabled
(...)

And indeed, the landscape repository was again removed from /etc/apt/sources.list:
(...)
# deb http://staging.landscape.canonical.com/packages/hardy ./

[Andreas Hasenack (ahasenack)]

My bad, this machine was using the staging repository and not the official landscape one.