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 32A128410E for ; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 18:27:42 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 1D25829919 for ; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 18:27:42 +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 1B8B02990A for ; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 18:27:40 +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 A27EF450F9 for ; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 18:27:40 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2021 18:27:39 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:96.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/96.0 Content-Language: en-US To: Proxmox VE development discussion , Stoiko Ivanov References: <20211210164947.3138643-1-s.ivanov@proxmox.com> From: Thomas Lamprecht In-Reply-To: <20211210164947.3138643-1-s.ivanov@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 1.484 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 NICE_REPLY_A -2.803 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 URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [control.in] Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH pve-kernel] fix #3781: add Provides: wireguard-modules to control.in 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: Fri, 10 Dec 2021 17:27:42 -0000 On 10.12.21 17:49, Stoiko Ivanov wrote: > without this line `apt install wireguard` pulls in Debian's kernel + > firmware which confilcts with pve-firmware - forcing users to install > via `apt install --no-install-recommends wireguard-tools` in order > to get the userspace utils. > > For Debian's upstream kernel the linux-image-amd64 provides the > modules [0] - since pve-kernel-@KVNAME@ already provides linux-image > this should be the place where we add the provides > > versioned dependency added since wireguard has a versioned dependency > on wireguard-modules. > > [0] https://salsa.debian.org/kernel-team/linux/-/blob/master/debian/templates/control.image.meta.in did we actually had users run into this? I'm probably way to accustomed to just installing `wireguard-tools` that I never even noticed that there's a meta package - I mean wireguard got mainlined with 5.6, that was released on 2020-01-26, so rather ancient ;-P anyhow, lgtm