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

Re: How to handle marked for removal



Everything is expected to be rebuilt before any of these packages actually end 
up getting removed.  However, if the dates get closer and things are not 
resolved I would recommend 1) subscribing to the removal bugs for the packages 
that are causing you problems, 2) asking a question on those bug reports if 
anyone knows what needs to be fixed and when it is expected to happen, 3) 
subscribing to debian-devel-announce where this transition is being discussed, 
and 4) asking Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> on that mailing list if he 
has any insights (only if desperate on this forth one as Steve is very busy 
handling this transition and probably doesn’t have time to respond to ever 
single email, especially if the information is already available somewhere 
else).

On Saturday, March 2, 2024 11:29:11 PM MST Loren M. Lang wrote:
> Hello Mentors,
> 
> I was notified that a package of mine is now marked for removal in
> testing due to the time_t change. This seems to be with packages that
> are indirect build dependencies. I don't see anything in my own package
> that uses time_t or date/time operations. I just want to know what my
> responsibility is for maintaining my package through this. As it does
> not seem to be my direct build dependency, I'm not sure if I even need
> to consider rebuilding anything.
> 
> My specific package is tiv which has a build-dep on cimg-dev and it
> seems somewhere down the line it has this:
> 
> 1062125: gimp: NMU diff for 64-bit time_t transition
>  https://bugs.debian.org/1062125
> 1063178: nifticlib: NMU diff for 64-bit time_t transition
>  https://bugs.debian.org/1063178
> 
> Do I need to respond or just wait it out?
> 
> Thanks


-- 
Soren Stoutner
soren@stoutner.com

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.


Reply to: