[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#1031589: Handling of RC bugs in firefox-esr

Control: severity 1021810 important

Hi,

On 19/02/2023 21:23, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:

On 2023-02-19 01:03:34 +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:

Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
X-Debbugs-Cc: Maintainers of Mozilla-related packages <team+pkg-mozilla@tracker.debian.org>
Control: block 1021810 982794 992150 993659 993660 by -1

popcon is no longer a criteria for key packages, which makes
firefox-esr subject to autoremoval that would be permanent
for bookworm at this point of the freeze.

Currently firefox-esr is on the autoremoval list due to 5 RC bugs.

While my personal opinion is that Debian should follow Ubuntu
which is now providing Chromium and Firefox only as snap
(perhaps using a different similar technology like flatpak),
not providing Firefox as a package in bookworm due to autoremoval
based on some random RC bug would be wrong.

If for some reason firefox-esr would intentionally not be shipped
in bookworm, then reverse dependencies currently on the autoremoval
list should get RC bugs for getting the chance to adapt.

It would be good if a release team member could review which RC bugs
in firefox-esr should be downgraded/ignored/fixed for bookworm.


We are down to #1021810 and #982794 which are both about support for 32
bit architectures. If we end up dropping 32 bit architectures from
firefox-esr, #982794 won't be an issue any more. If not, I think we can
ignore #982794 as it's not a regression compared to stable.

As Emilio commented in #1021801, I would defer to him on these two bugs.
As I said on #1021810 about possible build issues due to address space in the future, I think we should tackle those when the time comes. It may be true that some future Firefox updates will fail to build due to needing more memory, however it's also possible that we may be able to fix those issues by reducing the memory usage with some build flags.
Also note that one of the concerns was for armhf, which is now being built from arm64 buildds.
Thus I don't think removal on those arches based on that is warranted, and I'm downgrading that bug's severity.
As for #982794 and #1019246, I'm not sure which way to lean. Currently Firefox is broken on the baseline for i386 and armhf, but that only affects some hardware. We're doing a disservice to some users by shipping software that they can't run, but OTOH we would do a disservice to those other users who can (and do) run it. One option would be to depend on sse2-support / neon-support etc, but that probably leaves the system in a bad state.
Note that there's a MR to support the i386 baseline, which doesn't seem too unreasonable. 

Cheers,
Emilio

Perhaps a bookworm-ignore is the less evil solution, but I'm open to other options.

Cheers,
Emilio
Reply to: