Today’s SID upgrade removed pipewire packages without warning

[Member stevesr0]

Hi all,

After checking to avoid obvious package upgrades from a nonsystemd version to a systemd dependent debian one, I did a sudo apt full-upgrade.

To my horror, pipewire-pulse, pipewire-alsa, pipewire-audio and gstreamer1.0-pipewire were removed without warning (that I saw).

I assume that this was somehow a consequence of having held several pipewire packages so they wouldn’t be uprgraded to a nonsystemd version. Apt decided to remove these packages instead of sending me a notice that they could be removed by invoking autoremove.

It seems like a bug in apt to me. Haven’t looked to see if others have reported this.

After reinstalling the deleted packages and restarting X, sound seems to be functioning OK.

[Member ile]

Helpful

Up

0

::

hello stevesr0
antiX sid 6.1.42-antix.1 had no pinned packages; after upgrade pipewire and gstreamer
produces sound with control centre hardware setting disable pipewire.

[Member stevesr0]

Helpful

Up

0

::

Hi ile,

Thanks for replying.

You wrote

with control centre hardware setting DISABLE pipewire

That implies pipewire is disabled. If that is the case, then it doesn’t matter whether it has been removed or not.

Did you mean

…hardware setting ENABLE pipewire

If that is the case and pipewire is running, either the nosystemd version WASN’T removed or it (and gstreamer) were replaced by the new Debian versions.

Please clarify.

[Member ile]

Helpful

Up

0

::

hello stevesr0
(during early antiX23 volumeicon trial i got a good combination that worked; it was superseded by updates, so i just go with the repository versions for now follow, trial, observe.)
antiXsid on its tenth pipewire version since September 1.
not really engaging sound trials here.
One antiXsid, tubb, has no sound card.
tubb does not do sound, but package history can be checked there too. (that is incorrect; no pipewire installed in tubb.)

Saw Your post. Turned on antiX23sid WallE.
checked if pipewire had ever been removed, no, never.
checked pipewire always Nosystemd1, yes.
Control Centre Test Sound, sound and channel heard. Applications pmrp, firefox, no sound.
Control Centre Disable PipeWire, no change. Applications pmrp, firefox, no sound.
Update. I see the pipewire updates You mention.
Upgrade all and install strawberry.

Control Centre Test Sound, sound and channel heard. Applications no sound.
Disable pipewire, no change.
strawberry says gstreamer problem.
Shutdown. Start.

Control Centre Test Sound, sound and channel heard. Applications pmrp, firefox, strawberry, no sound.
Control Centre Disable PipeWire. Applications pmrp, firefox, strawberry, have working sound.

• This reply was modified 1 week, 5 days ago by ile.

[Member stevesr0]

Helpful

Up

0

::

Hi ile,

I think our problems are different. Mine involved a removal of pipewire packages “automagically”, while yours apparently wasn’t caused by the removal of pipewire packages.

When I did the upgrade and pipewire was removed, I didn’t check to see if ALSA was producing audio. I just confirmed (uh-duh) that PAVUCONTROL was broken.

After reinstalling the 4 removed nosystemd packages, everything worked again with pipewire ENABLED. I don’t know if the pipewire toggle has been installed on this SID system.

In your setup, apparently audio programs are only working when pipewire has been DISABLED (although still installed).

[Member ile]

Helpful

Up

0

::

stevesr0 ” looked to see if others have reported this.” packages removed.
Thinking my response is one instance of “reporting no” brought to you.
Your subject of “have a look at pipewire” had me find that improvement with sounds after good thing this upgrade.
We both report machine having sound.

[Member stevesr0]

Helpful

Up

0

::

Hi ile,

So you responded to document that in your system a recent Sid upgrade was NOT accompanied by removal of packages?

That presumably means there is a difference in our two Sid setups, such that apt “decided” that the removal should be done in my case, but not yours.

Obviously, if most Sid users have NOT experienced a similar event, it is probably a problem caused by a my peculiar combination of installed and upgradable packages, rather than a more general glitch in apt.

[Moderator Brian Masinick]

Helpful

Up

0

::

stevesr0 wrote:

Hi ile,

So you responded to document that in your system a recent Sid upgrade was NOT accompanied by removal of packages?

That presumably means there is a difference in our two Sid setups, such that apt “decided” that the removal should be done in my case, but not yours.

Obviously, if most Sid users have NOT experienced a similar event, it is probably a problem caused by a my peculiar combination of installed and upgradable packages, rather than a more general glitch in apt.

There are apt configuration files that indicate what to do with packages that areoptional or contain “Recommends” or other packaging instructions.
It could be that something differs between these two systems; if so that would explain the difference. The other difference may have been in the way in which two different people responded to the specific prompts as various packages were being installed; those are two ways I can think of to account for what appears to be different behavior.

--
Brian Masinick

[Member olsztyn]

Helpful

Up

0

::

stevesr0 wrote:

Obviously, if most Sid users have NOT experienced a similar event, it is probably a problem caused by a my peculiar combination of installed and upgradable packages, rather than a more general glitch in apt.

Just to respond with my test report, the recent updates on my trixie/sid antiX 23 did not result in removing pipewire.
Pipewire continues to be installed and sound based on this pipewire infrastructure works well as before the upgrade.
All pipewire components are running as usual. No other adverse issues noticed.
Just to add, my pipewire setup includes all the config enhancements developed by @abc-nix and other tuning developed and published by @abc-nix, anti-apXos and others. Sound works equally well and reliable in trixie/sid as in my mainstream antiX 23/Pipewire system, including flawless volume icon, which starts with just 1 sec. sleep delay.
This is just to report my testing experience on trixie/sid antiX 23.

One conjecture that might contribute to different experience might be that I do not have any held packages. I just do not update components from antiX specific versions to plain Debian versions.

• This reply was modified 1 week, 4 days ago by olsztyn.

Live antiX Boot Options (Previously posted by Xecure):
http://antixlinuxfan.miraheze.org/wiki/Table_of_antiX_Boot_Parameters

[Moderator Brian Masinick]

Helpful

Up

0

::

“One conjecture that might contribute to different experience might be that I do not have any held packages. I just do not update components from antiX specific versions to plain Debian versions.”

That’s a plausible explanation; one accidental inclusion of these held packages could also result in a change of behavior.

A while back I unintentionally installed some packages that added some systemd packages to my otherwise pristine system.

Fortunately I was sharing one of my configurations, and anticapitalista happened to spot my boo-boo, mentioned it in a response, and
I purged the errant packages, so even if something previously held is installed or we accidentally install a systemd package, as
long as we don’t install hundreds or thousands of such packages, it’s possible to fix it. If we REALLY mess it up badly (and I do
such things every now and then because I do *beat up* my system on occasion, doing BAD things, trying to BREAK it as part of negative
testing; the ALSO bad thing is that I’ve FORGOTTEN that I’ve done such things, so unless it breaks beyond repair and I reinstall,
sometimes I create a Frankenstein mess! It’s NOT a big deal because: 1) I have many systems, 2) I also have removable Flash Drives,
multiple instances and multiple ways and methods to reinstall or overwrite the messes I occasionally create.

Just to be safe, when in doubt, check the additional apt files that Debian and antiX use to provide guidance on which packages
to install, mark as Recommends, or whatever other package markings or priorities the package management files have configured.
If neither antiX nor Debian have any of these, chances are that’s a configuration issue; in which case that should be studied,
reviewed, and possibly modified according to the current release recommendations.

--
Brian Masinick

[Member stevesr0]

Helpful

Up

0

::

Hi all,

One difference in my Sid system and my antiX-22–>23 system is that I never had the antix-pipewire-extras package installed (and therefore never upgraded).

However, I can’t see why that would lead to the unrequested/”arbitrary” removal of packages which didn’t have a dependency issue. (I say that because apt install made no objection when I reinstalled them.

As an old geezer, it is possible that I perceived them as deleted rather than accidentally upgraded to a debian version. However, if that were the case, I would have expected PAVU to happily continue working…

(But olsztyn, I have no problem publicly acknowledging that your approach and skillset are probably very superior to mine <g>.)

• This reply was modified 1 week, 4 days ago by stevesr0.

[Member ile]

Helpful

Up

0

::

hello stevesr0
on Your opening post I give to You a Helpful +1,
because i check for updating subject posts before upgrading, and i found Your post. Thanks. Helpful.
antiXsid
Nov 20 another round of audio upon audio upgrades. new pipewire, wireplum.., appstream, aveverything…
Did the same test instantly gives sound everywhere. good upgrade. How is Yours?

Control Centre Test Sound, sound and channel heard. Applications pmrp, firefox, strawberry, have working sound.
Control Centre Disable PipeWire. Applications pmrp, firefox, strawberry, have working sound.
Control Centre Enable PipeWire. Applications pmrp, firefox, strawberry, have working sound.

[Member Xunzi_23]

Helpful

Up

0

::

Hi steves,
I have no experience or have ever had supported user reports of any glitch in apt causing:
unrequested/”arbitrary” removal of packages. I think you may not have read the apt manual
and used dist-upgrade command.

upgrade
upgrade is used to install the newest versions of all packages
currently installed on the system from the sources enumerated in
/etc/apt/sources.list. Packages currently installed with new
versions available are retrieved and upgraded; under no
circumstances are currently installed packages removed, or packages
not already installed retrieved and installed. New versions of
currently installed packages that cannot be upgraded without
changing the install status of another package will be left at
their current version. An update must be performed first so that
apt-get knows that new versions of packages are available.

dist-upgrade
dist-upgrade in addition to performing the function of upgrade,
also intelligently handles changing dependencies with new versions
of packages; apt-get has a “smart” conflict resolution system, and
it will attempt to upgrade the most important packages at the
expense of less important ones if necessary. So, dist-upgrade
command may remove some packages. The /etc/apt/sources.list file
contains a list of locations from which to retrieve desired package
files. See also apt_preferences(5) for a mechanism for overriding
the general settings for individual packages.

Apt is in use many thousands of times daily on both home and Key server systems,
if it glitched as you describe the internet would be full of reports.

[Member stevesr0]

Helpful

Up

0

::

Hi ile,

Thanks for the Helpful +1.

My Sid system has continued to have sound after the “full-upgrades” on the 20th. I haven’t tried pmol or strawberry. I will check those out and follow up.

Hi Xunzi_23,

Thanks for comment.

No, I avoid dist-upgrade. Just use full-upgrade. My understanding is that they each do similar things and differ from plain “upgrade” in that they OFFER to remove packages when necessary for the upgrade. My routine is to run

Sudo apt update && sudo apt full-upgrade

and say “n” when asked if I want to continue. Then I launch aptitude and look at each potential upgrade listed. Then I EITHER do selective simulated installs

sudo apt install -s

Of packages or hold some using

Sudo apt-mark hold <package1> <package 2> …

and rerun the full-upgrade to see what it now includes.

After a number of cycles, I will install the limited subset of upgradable packages.

While full-upgrade can remove packages, it should be doing so out of necessity. In that case, apt install should have complained when I REINSTALLED the nosystemd versions that were removed.

(It is possible that I have missed the UPGRADES of the nosystemd versions to higher Debian ones, but why would the system not complain about the absence of the systemd dependencies the Debian versions need?)

Obviously, if this thing happens extremely rarely, it will not be terribly important in other than “mission critical” systems, nor feasible to analyze. I reported it in case enough others find it happening to make it worth studying.

• This reply was modified 1 week, 3 days ago by stevesr0.
• This reply was modified 1 week, 3 days ago by stevesr0.

[Member Xunzi_23]

Helpful

Up

0

::

Obviously, if this thing happens extremely rarely, it will not be terribly important in other than “mission critical” systems, nor feasible to analyze. I reported it in case enough others find it happening to make it worth studying.

Downtimes cost money,

Please post the appropriate logfiles, from bash and apt to backup your claims.

[Author]

Posts