From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <f.ebner@proxmox.com>
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4EE37ABBF
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 28 Jun 2023 10:59:41 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 30B9F200DD
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 28 Jun 2023 10:59:11 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com
 [94.136.29.106])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256)
 (No client certificate requested)
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 28 Jun 2023 10:59:10 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
 by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 3FB0A40A01
 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 28 Jun 2023 10:59:10 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <d9b76624-42e2-22de-5586-f55480c417c5@proxmox.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2023 10:59:09 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.12.0
Content-Language: en-US
To: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion
 <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>, Christian Ebner <c.ebner@proxmox.com>
References: <20230628081005.48122-1-c.ebner@proxmox.com>
From: Fiona Ebner <f.ebner@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <20230628081005.48122-1-c.ebner@proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL 0.006 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
 BAYES_00                 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
 DMARC_MISSING             0.1 Missing DMARC policy
 KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment
 NICE_REPLY_A           -0.103 Looks like a legit reply (A)
 SPF_HELO_NONE           0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
 SPF_PASS               -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record
 T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE    -0.01 -
Subject: Re: [pbs-devel] [PATCH backup stable-2] pbs2to3: add upgrade
 checker binary
X-BeenThere: pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion
 <pbs-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pbs-devel>, 
 <mailto:pbs-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pbs-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pbs-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pbs-devel>, 
 <mailto:pbs-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2023 08:59:41 -0000

Am 28.06.23 um 10:10 schrieb Christian Ebner:
> Adds the pbs2to3 upgrade checker with some basic checks.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Christian Ebner <c.ebner@proxmox.com>

Some things I noticed:

> * chrony (Default in new Proxmox VE installations)

Should be "Proxmox Backup Server installations"

For repository checking, likely it's better to only check the suites of
enabled repositories and only the 'deb' ones (not 'deb-src').

My
deb http://deb.debian.org/debian-debug bullseye-debug main contrib
line produces:
NOTICE: found unusual suite 'debug', neighter old 'bullseye' nor new
'bookworm'..
but the suite is 'bullseye-debug'.