Michael Tokarev <mjt@tls.msk.ru> (2014-12-01): > So, can someone please tell me what's wrong with this unblock request? I did write in my first reply: “At this stage, I'd rather see the security fix only.” > I can try to fix built-using generation adding gcc to the mix but I'm > afraid to do that this late in the release cycle, especially after it > required so many iterations to get the most important in this context > part of built-using. Note that this most important part - which > prompted the original bug report wrt built-using - is here with proper > value (it is glibc which had bug in several versions, producing buggy > static binaries). Since these versions are (AFAICT) history now, having complex b-depends and/or b-conflicts looks like a thing we would like to avoid, which leads us back to the quote above. Mraw, KiBi.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature