Re: 64-bit time_t: an update
Hi all,
Quoting Steve Langasek (2023-07-19 23:27:21)
[snip]
> The "good" news is that, although there are over 1500 -dev packages yet to
> be analyzed, we have prioritized libraries based on the number of
> reverse-dependencies and therefore these 1500 -dev packages have among them
> less than 300 reverse-build-dependencies that have not already been
> identified as part of the transition (800 of these -dev packages have no
> reverse-build-dependencies at all).
>
> Therefore, I would like to propose the following.
>
> - Assume the remaining 1500 -dev packages are affected by the ABI breakage.
> This will increase the number of library packages included in the
> transition requiring sourceful uploads from < 500 to 2000[1], but will
> only increase the number of packages requiring rebuilds from 5300 to 5600.
>
> - Agree a target window together with the Release Team for when the
> transition will be uploaded to unstable; and based on this, set a deadline
> beforehand for finalizing the list of library packages whose binary
> package names will be changed.
>
> - We in Ubuntu Foundations will continue on a best effort basis to drive
> down the list of -dev packages which cannot be analyzed, until that
> deadline.
>
> - Any party (maintainer or otherwise) interested in having some of these
> library packages excluded from the transition is welcome to contribute
> fixes up to that deadline that will let us analyze them and show that the
> ABI has not changed.
In order to avoid duplicating efforts, I've created a wiki page listing
all the packages that are still to be dealt with:
https://wiki.debian.org/ArmhfTimeTTodo
It's fairly crude, but hopefully enough for the purpose.
I'll be working the entire week on reducing that list, so if anyone
joining in the fun wants to discuss it, feel free to ping me on IRC
(schopin).
Cheers
--
Simon Chopin
Foundations Team Ubuntu MOTU/Core Dev
simon.chopin@canonical.com schopin@ubuntu.com
Reply to: