Hi, On 13-04-2025 17:12, Helmut Grohne wrote:
That said, Emilio explicitly asked them not to be filed as rc on irc. That feels like RT is not internally consistent here. How about filing them as rc now and tagging them trixie-ignore later if we deem the effort too big?
What I think he means, and I agree with him if I'm right, we don't want a _new_ systematic QA effort like this _at this stage_ of the release to add lots of RC bugs for a case where the RC-ness only comes from the way we run our autoremoval. I'm monitoring the "self-contained" state of trixie [1] for more then a year now and I've been filing (RC) bugs to make packages aware of problems (not only for this class of issues). Currently trixie is nearly fully self-contained in this respect. So at this moment this RC problem (running with nocheck build profile changes the content of the package) is in practice not a critical issue for trixie.
What I really want to avoid is that people get afraid to add the !nocheck profile. It's valuable to have, let's not scare people so late in the release cycle.
Paul [1] https://qa.debian.org/dose/debcheck/src_testing_main/
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
