On 2020-06-04 13:06, Matthias Klose wrote: > On 5/21/20 11:39 AM, 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 2.31. It is available in > > experimental for more than 2 months and there are no known issues or > > regression. It has been built successfully on all release architectures > > and most ports architectures. It fails to build on ia64 and sparc64 due > > to a few testsuite issues that need to be investigated and which are > > similar to existing failures in version 2.30. It doesn't build on > > kfreebsd-*, but this has been the case for a few glibc releases already. > > > > As 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 > > - gcc-9 (s390x only) > > - libnih > > - libnss-db > > - r-bioc-preprocesscore > > - unscd > > > > Compare to the previous transition, gcc-10 and gcc-snapshot got removed, > > and r-bioc-preprocesscore got added. > > > > Here is the corresponding ben file: > > title = "glibc"; > > is_affected = .depends ~ /libc[0-9.]* \(<</; > > is_good = .depends ~ /libc[0-9.]* \(<< 2.32\)/; > > is_bad = .depends ~ /libc[0-9.]* \(<< 2.31\)/; > > > > 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, however those are really limited in this version. > > there are dozens of packages that ftbfs with this new version. Please could > you > at least file bug reports for all of those?
Yes I can do that. Do you have a list available? Aurelien -- Aurelien Jarno GPG: 4096R/1DDD8C9B aurel...@aurel32.net http://www.aurel32.net
