On 2024-01-05 00:23:00 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Fri, Jan 05, 2024 at 12:17:04AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > > == Results == > > > > The overall findings of this analysis are 1,745 "dev" packages which either > > are confirmed to have ABI changes or could not be checked; mapping to 2,154 > > runtime libraries (list attached) from 1,195 source packages (list attached) > > and 5,477 reverse-dependencies requiring no-change rebuilds (list attached). > > This is within the previously calculated range of "5300 to 5600", but there > > are a number of newly-identified packages that fail to compile and have a > > large number of reverse-dependencies. I will continue to work to identify > > false-positives here in the hopes of bringing this count down before pulling > > the trigger on an actual transition. > > [...] > > > In addition, Guillem pointed out that if there are libraries whose ABIs are > > lfs-sensitive but not time_t-sensitive, and either they themselves depend on > > libraries which are time_t-sensitive or they have reverse-dependencies that > > do, so they will also need to be included in the transition. I have > > identified a list of 53 packages in this category (list attached); these in > > turn have 174 additional reverse-dependencies that would need rebuilt (list > > attached). > > I am also attaching here the dd-list output for the packages that will need > to be sourcefully NMUed for the transition, for your review.
Why do the need sourceful NMUs if they just need to be rebuilt? Cheers -- Sebastian Ramacher
