[SRU] Update to 0.15.2-2ubuntu0.1 for jammy

Bug #2006110 reported by Corentin Noël
24
This bug affects 4 people
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
Flatpak
New
Undecided
Unassigned
appstream (Ubuntu)
Fix Released
Undecided
Unassigned
Jammy
Incomplete
Undecided
Unassigned

Bug Description

The attached debdiff contains two targeted fixes to address noisy warning messages when AppStream is used with newer Flatpak versions.

[ Impact ]

 * Appstream is used by GNOME Software, KDE Discover, Flatpak, Snaps and probably lot of other components. However, this fix has already been well-tested for over a year.

[ Test Plan ]

 * Open GNOME Software and KDE Discover and see that it is still populated with data.

[ Where problems could occur ]

 * If GNOME Software / KDE Discover still show all applications, everything should be fine, as this is the codepath this change touches.
 * `apt update` should not emit any warning messages from AppStream.

[ Other Info ]

 *

Corentin Noël (tintou)
summary: - [SRU] Update to latest bugfix release
+ [SRU] Update to latest bugfix release for jammy
Revision history for this message
Matthias Klumpp (ximion) wrote : Re: [SRU] Update to latest bugfix release for jammy

In any case, don't take 0.16.0 without this patch: https://github.com/ximion/appstream/commit/631303a8d16c2f608428a89bb94511bc28ae5417 - otherwise anything that's using GIR bindings will crash. I will be making an emergency 0.16.1 release soon, and all previous releases are perfectly fine and well tested too :-)

Simon McVittie (smcv)
affects: flatpak (Ubuntu) → flatpak
Revision history for this message
Launchpad Janitor (janitor) wrote :

Status changed to 'Confirmed' because the bug affects multiple users.

Changed in appstream (Ubuntu):
status: New → Confirmed
Revision history for this message
Paddy Landau (paddy-landau) wrote :

An easy way to check if the bug is still present in Ubuntu is to enter a flatpak-search command, e.g.

flatpak search meld

At the time of writing, this produces 3,010 spurious identical error messages. This bug is relevant:

https://github.com/flatpak/flatpak/issues/5323

Note: flatpak version 1.14.3

Revision history for this message
Simon McVittie (smcv) wrote :

> [flatpak search meld] produces 3,010 spurious identical error messages

That's https://github.com/ximion/appstream/issues/384, which is a libappstream bug that cannot be fixed by a Flatpak change (as much as we might like to). I contributed a fix which was included in appstream 0.15.3, so this SRU would incorporate that fix.

Matthias Klumpp (ximion)
summary: - [SRU] Update to latest bugfix release for jammy
+ [SRU] Update to 0.15.2-2ubuntu0.1 for jammy
description: updated
Revision history for this message
Matthias Klumpp (ximion) wrote :

This debdiff contains a minimal fix to resolve the noisy assertions (and potential crash) when searching for AppStream data.

It should be suitable for upload to Jammy.
@tintou, sorry for hijacking the SRU report a bit, in hindsight I should probably have filed a new one. This should address the most visible issue though without any risk of introducing new problems.

(It would still be nice to have a more recent AppStream in Jammy, but we can request that later)

Jeremy Bícha (jbicha)
Changed in appstream (Ubuntu):
status: Confirmed → Fix Released
Changed in appstream (Ubuntu Jammy):
status: New → Triaged
Revision history for this message
Robie Basak (racb) wrote :

Just driving past while someone mentioned it and and trying to help this along.

I suggest that you combine this with bug 2023215 and arrange a comprehensive Test Plan which verifies that both issues are fixed as well and that "normal" use cases (whatever they might be - I don't know) aren't regressed. You mentioned that Snaps use them, and we know that Snaps are default on Ubuntu - so it absolutely must be tested that Appstream behaviour hasn't regressed on Snaps as part of the Test Plan, surely?

This bug also needs to explain what is actually broken from the user's perspective please - what noisy warning messages where? And the Test Plan should clearly verify that what you're trying to fix is actually fixed.

Same for the other bug - rather than "observe the failure" please make it clear what the failure actually is, so somebody following the Test Plan can be confident that it's actually gone.

Revision history for this message
Robie Basak (racb) wrote :

Please also adjust the bug title to describe what the actual problem is that you're fixing. Depending on what that is, it may be appropriate to mark one bug as a dupe of the other (or not if they then describe obviously separate things).

It's fine if they end up distinct but with a single Test Plan between them, if that's what makes sense.

Jeremy Bícha (jbicha)
Changed in appstream (Ubuntu Jammy):
assignee: nobody → Jeremy Bícha (jbicha)
Revision history for this message
Jeremy Bícha (jbicha) wrote :

I am setting the bug status to incomplete because I was unable to figure out how to verify the bug or bugfix for the patches provided here.

Changed in appstream (Ubuntu Jammy):
status: Triaged → Incomplete
assignee: Jeremy Bícha (jbicha) → nobody
Revision history for this message
Jeremy Bícha (jbicha) wrote :

I am also unsubscribing ubuntu-sponsors since this patch and bug report are not ready for sponsoring yet. Please feel to resubscribe once the requested changes have been made.

Or you can reach out to us if you need more help or clarification on what we are looking for.

If you haven't seen it yet, our documentation is at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates

Revision history for this message
Matthias Klumpp (ximion) wrote (last edit ):

Since it's a race condition, it's hard to reproduce. The most reliable way to do so is with Flatpak 1.14.x, which isn't part of Jammy.
So, if you're fine with having this potential issue for other tools in the OS, that apparently isn't triggered by anything currently in Jammy, then this doesn't need to be addressed.

The more important immediate issue is the one in appstream-glib, and that's being fixed :-)

Revision history for this message
Jeremy Bícha (jbicha) wrote :

What about the other patch you provided here?

To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  
Everyone can see this information.

Other bug subscribers

Remote bug watches

Bug watches keep track of this bug in other bug trackers.