Martin Michlmayr writes: > * Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-06-04 21:01]: > > As we are below the 20 packages count if bug #366820 is correct (and > > Martin just confirmed the number), it is ok to do the switch now. > > Martin, can you please also mark these bugs as serious now (as > > they're FTBFS then)? > > Yes, we have been under 20 bugs for a while now. Most of the > outstanding bugs fall into two categories: > - bugs that have been fixed upstream and are now waiting for a new > version > - packages that have other RC bugs and cannot be uploaded > Fortunately, the former is the majority. All maintainers of these > packages are aware of the importance of these bugs and I'll continue > to pester them. ;-) > > While I've been building the archive with gcc 4.2 recently, I've > haven't done a re-run with 4.1.1 yet. Matthias uploaded the packages > a few days ago and they passed NEW today so I'll do it this week. > I don't expect many new issues from this though. Furthermore, I > assume that some of the packages that passed through NEW might not > build with gcc 4.1 but again that should not be a show stopper. > > I found one serious bug in 4.1.1 though (#370308) which needs to be > fixed before 4.1 can be the default (since it produces a bogus error > on some Perl headers which get included by many packages). Matthias > is aware of this and is (I think) working on an update already (one > single patch needs to be reverted). gcc-defaults can be changed after > a new 4.1.1 package enters the archive.
4.1.1-2 uploaded. I'll upload a new gcc-defaults with a build dependency on that version tomorrow. > In terms of architectures, there wasn't terribly much feedback from > the porters. right, we did see most feedback from the non-release architectures. > However, I have done full archive rebuilds on a number > of the architectures in the meantime and it looks good. I might have > missed a bug or two since I didn't investigate each error in detail > this time but I think most errors I ignored where generic build > problems or something related to the new X. > > The status, as far as I'm concerned, is the following: > > arch status tests > ------------------------------------------------- > + alpha good full archive rebuilt > + amd64 good full archive rebuilt > ? arm unknown untested > ? hppa would benefit from 4.1 (abi); untested it requires 4.1 (or removal of 4.1); architecture specific abi changes. all packages depending on libgcc2 need to be rebuilt. once the required packages are rebuilt, libgcc4 will need to conflict with libgcc2. > + i386 good full archive rebuilt > ? ia64 unknown untested > + mips good full archive rebuilt > + mipsel see mips > + powerpc good full archive rebuilt > > - hurd-i386 didn't build until recently; fixed in 4.1.1 > ? kfreebsd-i386 they'd like to have 4.1 > + m68k 4.1 fixes many compiler bugs > ? s390 unknown untested > + sparc good full archive rebuilt > > -- > Martin Michlmayr > http://www.cyrius.com/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
