[FFe] Remove deb to snap transitional package

[Stéphane Graber]

The `lxd` package (`lxd`, `lxd-client`, `lxd-tools`) has been replaced by a snap starting with Ubuntu 18.10. To facilitate that, the main `lxd` package was turned into an automatic conversion package which on install will trigger the installation of the snap and migration of the data from the deb to the snap.

It also accidentally served the role of having a deb package which would pull in the lxd snap.

As this package didn't really serve much of a purpose after the 18.04 to 20.04 upgrade handling, it should be removed from the archive and not make it into another LTS release.

Looking at its rdepends, we have:
 - adapt (depends)
 - autopkgtest (suggests)
 - lxd-installer (conflicts)

Of those only `adapt` needs something done to handle this change.
Looking at `adapt`, it's been broken for many many years, due to using a deprecated image server for LXD. As a result, I don't believe anyone could have used it since around the 16.04 times.

My suggestion here is that we do:
 - Delete adapt from the archive
 - Delete lxd from the archive

I'm marking this as a Feature Freeze Exception as two packages would go away from the archive, but neither are actually useful today so there should be no actual user visible impact from this.

[Steve Langasek (vorlon)]

> but neither are actually useful today

What is the reason for saying this about the adapt package, which appears to be a loosely coupled consumer of lxd?

[Stéphane Graber (stgraber)]

The `adapt` package has been broken since at least 2016 as it hardcodes an image server path and patterns that haven't been valid for years.

As a result, it's impossible for anyone to have successfully used adapt on Ubuntu since pre-16.04.

[Stéphane Graber (stgraber)]

Basically `adapt` expects that `images.linuxcontainers.org` is a LXD-protocol server, it doesn't know about our transition to simplestreams starting at around LXD 2.0.4 (August 2016) and those image servers have not actually supported that older API for a long time now.

[Steve Langasek (vorlon)]

In that case, yes, this looks ok from an FFe POV given that nothing else references the lxd deb in the archive.

[Stéphane Graber (stgraber)]

Removing packages from jammy:
 lxd 1:0.9 in jammy
  lxd 1:0.9 in jammy amd64
  lxd 1:0.9 in jammy arm64
  lxd 1:0.9 in jammy armhf
  lxd 1:0.9 in jammy i386
  lxd 1:0.9 in jammy ppc64el
  lxd 1:0.9 in jammy riscv64
  lxd 1:0.9 in jammy s390x
  lxd-client 1:0.9 in jammy amd64
  lxd-client 1:0.9 in jammy arm64
  lxd-client 1:0.9 in jammy armhf
  lxd-client 1:0.9 in jammy i386
  lxd-client 1:0.9 in jammy ppc64el
  lxd-client 1:0.9 in jammy riscv64
  lxd-client 1:0.9 in jammy s390x
  lxd-tools 1:0.9 in jammy amd64
  lxd-tools 1:0.9 in jammy arm64
  lxd-tools 1:0.9 in jammy armhf
  lxd-tools 1:0.9 in jammy i386
  lxd-tools 1:0.9 in jammy ppc64el
  lxd-tools 1:0.9 in jammy riscv64
  lxd-tools 1:0.9 in jammy s390x
 adapt 1.5-0ubuntu1 in jammy
  adapt 1.5-0ubuntu1 in jammy amd64
  adapt 1.5-0ubuntu1 in jammy arm64
  adapt 1.5-0ubuntu1 in jammy armhf
  adapt 1.5-0ubuntu1 in jammy i386
  adapt 1.5-0ubuntu1 in jammy ppc64el
  adapt 1.5-0ubuntu1 in jammy riscv64
  adapt 1.5-0ubuntu1 in jammy s390x
Comment: LP: #1964786
Remove [y|N]? y
2 packages successfully removed.