Uploaded image for project: 'Jenkins'
  1. Jenkins
  2. JENKINS-44504

Jenkins 2.46.3 LTS was released with wrong packaging baseline

    Details

    • Type: Bug
    • Status: Resolved (View Workflow)
    • Priority: Blocker
    • Resolution: Fixed
    • Component/s: packaging
    • Labels:
      None
    • Similar Issues:

      Description

      Today I have checked Jenkins 2.46.3 release to make sure Jenkins was released with right packaging. And... it was not.

      According to the Debian metadata, everything has been released with the latest packaging. It means that Java 8 is enforced for 2.46.3 (JENKINS-44502). There were also high-risk changes like JENKINS-23273 integrated

      Output for Debian 2.46.3 metadata:

      MacBook-Pro-onenashev-2:2.46.3_deb nenashev$ cat control
      Package: jenkins
      Version: 2.46.3
      Architecture: all
      Maintainer: Kohsuke Kawaguchi <kk@kohsuke.org>
      Installed-Size: 68732
      Depends: daemon, adduser, procps, psmisc, net-tools, default-jre-headless (>= 2:1.8) | java8-runtime-headless
      Conflicts: hudson
      Replaces: hudson
      Section: devel
      Priority: extra
      Homepage: http://jenkins.io/
      Description: Jenkins is an open source automation server which enables developers around the world to reliably automate  their development lifecycle processes of all kinds, including build, document, test, package, stage, deployment, static analysis and many more.
       .
       Jenkins is being widely used in areas of Continuos Integration, Continuous Delivery, DevOps, and other areas. And it is not only about software, the same automation techniques can be applied in other areas like Hardware Engineering, Embedded Systems, BioTech, etc.
      
      

        Attachments

          Issue Links

            Activity

            Hide
            danielbeck Daniel Beck added a comment - - edited

            In theory, a packaging re-release should do it, but we're not versioning those, but would replace them. AFAIR – we did that a while back – this caused problems the last time, perhaps due to caching?

            Perhaps INFRA-156?

            Show
            danielbeck Daniel Beck added a comment - - edited In theory, a packaging re-release should do it, but we're not versioning those, but would replace them. AFAIR – we did that a while back – this caused problems the last time, perhaps due to caching? Perhaps INFRA-156 ?
            Hide
            danielbeck Daniel Beck added a comment -

            JENKINS-33776 indicates a simple packaging re-release should work.

            Show
            danielbeck Daniel Beck added a comment - JENKINS-33776 indicates a simple packaging re-release should work.
            Hide
            kohsuke Kohsuke Kawaguchi added a comment -

            Packaging re-release in progress

            Show
            kohsuke Kohsuke Kawaguchi added a comment - Packaging re-release in progress
            Hide
            danielbeck Daniel Beck added a comment -

            https://github.com/jenkinsci/packaging/commit/c524a823dc1afd4b43e611c3216d5a0d9e28013d is used for packaging re-release. It's the same as used for 2.46.2 and presumable 2.46.1. Newer than what existed for 2.46, but those were fairly inconsequential changes.

            Show
            danielbeck Daniel Beck added a comment - https://github.com/jenkinsci/packaging/commit/c524a823dc1afd4b43e611c3216d5a0d9e28013d is used for packaging re-release. It's the same as used for 2.46.2 and presumable 2.46.1. Newer than what existed for 2.46, but those were fairly inconsequential changes.
            Hide
            danielbeck Daniel Beck added a comment -

            Updated packages should now be available.

            Show
            danielbeck Daniel Beck added a comment - Updated packages should now be available.
            Hide
            danielbeck Daniel Beck added a comment -

            Now it's actually fixed. An optimization skipped reuploading files that already existed.

            Show
            danielbeck Daniel Beck added a comment - Now it's actually fixed. An optimization skipped reuploading files that already existed.

              People

              • Assignee:
                kohsuke Kohsuke Kawaguchi
                Reporter:
                oleg_nenashev Oleg Nenashev
              • Votes:
                1 Vote for this issue
                Watchers:
                4 Start watching this issue

                Dates

                • Created:
                  Updated:
                  Resolved: