From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: 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 DEE7884998 for ; Tue, 14 Dec 2021 14:40:42 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id CDCB425AB3 for ; Tue, 14 Dec 2021 14:40:12 +0100 (CET) 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)) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id 175E325AA8 for ; Tue, 14 Dec 2021 14:40:12 +0100 (CET) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id E47EF4517A for ; Tue, 14 Dec 2021 14:40:11 +0100 (CET) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2021 14:40:05 +0100 From: Fabian =?iso-8859-1?q?Gr=FCnbichler?= To: Proxmox VE development discussion References: <20211213145216.1603326-1-s.ivanov@proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: <20211213145216.1603326-1-s.ivanov@proxmox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: astroid/0.15.0 (https://github.com/astroidmail/astroid) Message-Id: <1639485885.7pp9wu9zsu.astroid@nora.none> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.249 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [proxmox.com, control.in] Subject: [pve-devel] applied-series: [PATCH pve-kernel-meta/pve-kernel] add Provides for plain debian packages X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2021 13:40:42 -0000 for the active branches for 7.x/2.x On December 13, 2021 3:52 pm, Stoiko Ivanov wrote: > This series results from an off-list discussion following > https://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/2021-December/051178.html >=20 > Mostly the point was that adding a > `Provides: linux-headers-$(uname -r)-amd64` would help our users who > install various DKMS packages and don't expect our kernel headers > to be name pve-headers. >=20 > Since the patch already touches both pve-kernel and pve-kernel-meta I > decided to put the `Provides: wireguard-modules (=3D1.0.0)` in the > meta-package, following Debian upstream. >=20 > Tested: > * installing `proxmox-ve` on top of a plain debian VM - to check that thi= s > still works smootly > * afterwards install `wireguard` > * running `apt install linux-headers-$(uname -r)-amd64` >=20 > pve-kernel-meta: > Stoiko Ivanov (2): > d/control.in: Provide linux-image/linux-headers > fix #3781: add Provides: wireguard-modules to control.in >=20 > debian/control.in | 2 ++ > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) >=20 > pve-kernel: > Stoiko Ivanov (1): > d/control.in: Provide versioned linux-image/linux-headers >=20 > debian/control.in | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >=20 > --=20 > 2.30.2 >=20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > pve-devel mailing list > pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com > https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel >=20 >=20 >=20