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

Re: Backports needed for Firefox/Thunderbird ESR 78 in Buster/Stretch



[Adding debian-devel to the list]

On Sun, Aug 02, 2020 at 06:21:30PM +0200, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote:
> > We are at this point again. ESR 68 will be EOL on September 22nd, when 78.3
> > comes out. We have some time still, but if we want FF and TB to keep being
> > supported, we'll have to do some toolchain backports as usual.
> > 
> > Has someone started to look at this?
> > 
> > I have taken a quick look and it looks like we need rustc 1.41 and cargo 0.31.
> > We currently have:
> > 
> > rustc      | 1.34.2+dfsg1-1~deb9u1 | oldstable
> > rustc      | 1.34.2+dfsg1-1        | stable
> > rustc      | 1.44.1+dfsg1-1        | unstable
> > 
> > cargo      | 0.35.0-2~deb9u2 | oldstable
> > cargo      | 0.35.0-2        | stable
> > cargo      | 0.43.1-3        | unstable
> > 
> > We may need other deps after those (such as an updated cbindgen or other
> > modules) or some packages in order to build those (possibly LLVM 9, I'm not sure
> > yet).
> 
> I don't have time to work on this, I'm away for large parts of August,
> but I had a look at what is needed:
> 
> We'll need LLVM 9 (which was a straight rebuild on buster in my test),
> wasi-libc (also a straight rebuild with LLVM 9) and updated rustc. Updating
> rustc will require some intermediate rustc/cargo uploads as we can't build
> 1.41 with 1.34.

(Or alternatively bootstrapping rust/cargo again)

> I think we can reuse the same approach as before, by staging uploads
> in -proposed-updates (or on stretch-security respectively) and then
> configure the security chroots to use -proposed-updates until 10.6
> is eventually released.

I can upload my backports of LLVM and wasi-libc, but this still needs a volunteer for
the remaining parts (rustc/cargo) if we want to have firefox-esr / thunderbird
in Buster after the end of ESR68.

Otherwise there's still getting Thunderbird and Firefix from Flathub.

Cheers,
        Moritz


Reply to: