Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

support for Ubuntu devel (rolling) #469

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

laniusone
Copy link

I know that current devel (kinetic) is technically supported, but when installing it via Rolling Rhino Remix ISO, resulting codename is 'devel' and not 'kinetic', so the script doesn't recognize the distribution. I added a tiny fix to the case statement.

@natanjunges
Copy link
Contributor

Please provide the output of:

cat /etc/lsb-release
cat /etc/os-release

@laniusone
Copy link
Author

/bin/cat /etc/lsb-release
DISTRIB_ID=Ubuntu
DISTRIB_RELEASE=22.10
DISTRIB_CODENAME=devel
DISTRIB_DESCRIPTION="Ubuntu Kinetic Kudu (development branch)"
/bin/cat /etc/os-release
PRETTY_NAME="Rolling Rhino Remix"
NAME="Ubuntu"
VERSION_ID="22.10"
VERSION="22.10 (Kinetic Kudu)"
VERSION_CODENAME=devel
ID=ubuntu
ID_LIKE=debian
HOME_URL="https://www.rollingrhino.org"
SUPPORT_URL="https://help.ubuntu.com/"
BUG_REPORT_URL="https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/"
PRIVACY_POLICY_URL="https://www.ubuntu.com/legal/terms-and-policies/privacy-policy"
UBUNTU_CODENAME=devel
LOGO=ubuntu-logo

@natanjunges
Copy link
Contributor

This distribution really does not follow the standards from neither Debian nor Ubuntu. It could be argued if we should even bother supporting those distributions, since the whole purpose of using those standards is not having to deal with each case individually. But as the required changes are not so big, I guess it is fine.

@laniusone
Copy link
Author

Ok, thank you! I will create an issue in their repo anyway, so that they fix it, because I guess it should follow the standards, as technically it is just the devel branch of kinetic with some extra tools.

@natanjunges
Copy link
Contributor

Actually, thinking about the implications of the change you propose, unless the distribution changes its /etc/os-release file, it might be impractical to support it. UPSTREAM_CODENAME should only be the codename of a release of either Debian or Ubuntu, since the functions for the packages rely on that. And the UBUNTU_CODENAME field in /etc/os-release should only be the codename of a release of Ubuntu (hence the name), and VERSION_CODENAME should be used for custom codenames such as this one.

@laniusone
Copy link
Author

I actually agree that this should be fixed on the distro-side, so I'm closing this.

@laniusone laniusone closed this Oct 16, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants