Control: forwarded -1 https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/glibc-2.26.html
On 04/01/18 21:56, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > On 2018-01-02 22:47, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: >> Control: tags -1 confirmed >> >> On 02/01/18 22:37, Aurelien Jarno wrote: >>> Package: release.debian.org >>> Severity: normal >>> User: release.debian....@packages.debian.org >>> Usertags: transition >>> >>> Dear release team, >>> >>> I would like to get a transition slot for glibc 2.26. It is available in >>> experimental for one month and a half, and there is no known regression. >>> It has been built successfully on all release architectures, and most >>> other architectures besides kfreebsd-* which do not have build daemons >>> anymore. The failures on hurd-i386 and hppa are being worked on and can >>> be fixed in the upload to sid or later, so I don't think we should block >>> the transition on that. >>> >>> As the glibc is using symbol versioning, there is no soname change. That >>> said a few packages are using libc internal symbols and have to be >>> rebuilt for this transition: >>> - apitrace >>> - bro >>> - dante >>> - libnih >>> - libnss-db >>> - p11-kit >>> - unscd >>> >>> Here is the corresponding ben file: >>> title = "glibc"; >>> is_affected = .depends ~ /libc[0-9.]* \(<</; >>> is_good = .depends ~ /libc[0-9.]* \(<< 2.27\)/; >>> is_bad = .depends ~ /libc[0-9.]* \(<< 2.26\)/; >>> >>> In addition a few new symbols have been added that might prevent a few >>> other packages to migrate to testing until glibc migrates if they pick >>> up the new symbols. That's mostly the case for libm.so, which added >>> 128-bit floating point support on amd64, i386, and ppc64el. On the >>> libc.so side the new functions are reallocarray, preadv2 and pwritev2, >>> which should not be widely used so far. >>> >>> Thanks for considering >> >> Please go ahead. > > Thanks. I uploaded it yesterday and it has now been built on all > official architectures. binNMUs scheduled. Emilio
