Web lists-archives.com

Re: kernel "unsigned" in sid

On 14/01/19 11:20 PM, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2019-01-11 09:52:04 -0500, Michael Stone wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 09:55:45AM +0100, dotdeb@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
>>> I recently came across an inconsistency in sid that it seems difficult (to me)
>>> to overcome.
>>> A kernel package named linux-image-4.19.0-1-amd64-unsigned provides the running
>>> kernel but, since few days ago, it creates conflicts with the metapackage
>>> linux-image-amd64 (bercause it depends on linux-image-4.19.0-1-amd which, in
>>> turn, conflicts with the installed kernel).
>>> I can't trivially replace the "unsigned" (BTW, what does "unsigned" stand for,
>>> anyway?) version with linux-image-4.19.0-1-amd because of the same version
>>> number.
>>> I'm not really worried because this will probably be solved when moving to the
>>> next kernel release but the situation is a bit annoying.
>>> Is there any solution?
>> How did you get the unsigned kernel installed in the first place? It's not
>> typically installed, and I don't see any dependencies that would pull it in.
> Until a few weeks ago, it could be installed due to a "Provides:".
> See the following bug I had reported:
>   https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=916927
> This problem is now solved, i.e. the "Provides:" was dropped.
> But perhaps this is what is causing the *temporary* issue the
> user has above.

That's how I got that kernel via backports - the unsigned version of
4.19 is the only one available in stretch-backports.

What worries me more than it being unsigned is that it appears to be
Tainted - is that normal for bpo kernels? I don't remember seeing it in
the past.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature