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

Bug#850887: Decide proper solution for binutils' mips* bug

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 16:56:05 -0500, Sam Hartman wrote:

> Hi.
> I'd really appreciate comments from debian-release on this issue.
> Would debian-release like us to take this up?
> If so, I have a proposal for how to fast-track this situation, but I am
> only comfortable doing that if the release team is involved.
Hi Sam,

I was actually about to involve the TC (from a release management
perspective) when Lisandro did.

Here's a timeline I think summarizes events ttbomk:
- on 31 October 2016, the release team finalized the list of release
  architectures for stretch, including mips, mipsel and mips64el
- on 2 November 2016, the binutils maintainer switch from the upstream
  2.27 branch to upstream trunk, which caused a number of regressions
- on 5 November 2016 was the transition freeze for stretch, which is
  intended to reduce the amount of churn affecting many packages at once
- one of the regressions is still unfixed to this day, and blocks a
  number of package migrations to testing, including library transitions
  and RC bug fixes, to the point that if it doesn't get fixed in the
  next few days the options are to either delay the stretch freeze
  (planned for 5 February) or drop three architectures from stretch; I
  feel like a freeze delay might end up being necessary due to this bug
  anyway, even if it does get fixed now
- early this week Lisandro finally NMUed with a patch for this bug, only
  to be promptly reverted by the maintainer

I think it's way past time we fixed this, to avoid any further harm to
the stretch release.  That may mean reverting to the 2.27 branch,
reverting specific changes from our 2.28 branch snapshot, or applying a
proposed fix ahead of upstream, I'm not picky about specifics.  Help
from the TC in getting to a quick resolution would be very much welcome.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: