Status report on perl 5.22 transition readiness
Hello all,
Here is a quick update on progress since I filed the transition bug
at Debconf:
The current stats for this transition are as follows:
* Number of binNMUs needed: 571[1] (no change)
* Number of arch:any packages which FTBFS with perl 5.22: 8 (was 9)
* 1 fix in experimental; 7 needing more work or removal.
* libapache2-mod-perl2 remains problematic, but upstream have
indicated willingness to fix the problem recently[2]
* If it comes to it, I suppose that removing the package
from testing is an option, though it won't be particularly
popular
* Number of arch:all packages which FTBFS with perl 5.22: 19
(was ~ 60)[3], with with delayed uploads pending for 7 of those
* I finally finished catching up with my rebuild logs, and filed a
few extra bugs subsequent to my last report
* Special thanks to gregoa, who has put an huge amount of work
into squashing these bugs, especially on the NMU side.
* Total number of FTBFS bugs closed: 235
I'm continuing rebuilds of arch:any packages which depend on perlapi-*
or libperl* daily, so the test repository[4] remains almost up-to-date
with the archive. Problem reports welcome (to me), and of course further
testing (in a controlled, development environment) of packages you use is
welcome.
Experimental now has the version of perl with the reproducible build
fixes (5.22.0-3). Thanks to Niko and Lunar for those! There's not much
movement on 5.22.1 so I am assuming we'll transition with something
very similar to 5.22.0-3. Since the last report, perl started FTBFS on
kfreebsd-*, due to a kernel change[5], but since they are no longer
release architectures that issue shouldn't, I believe, block the
transition.
There is a small bug in the multi-arch support we're introducing in
perl 5.22[6], which means that libperl5.22 isn't co-installable between
architectures, even though it should be. This isn't technically a blocker
for the transition, but may qualify as RC once the package is
unstable, so it should be fixed soon. That should be reasonably
straightforward.
In other multi-arch news, the proposed change to the perl policy[7]
should be updated to reflect the subsequent minor changes to paths[8].
This does not block the transition.
The package layout change was announced to d-d-a in [9]. To my
knowledge, we didn't get any feedback.
The release team have indicated informally that they aren't far off
being ready for the perl transition, but there is still quite a bit
of fallout from the libstdc++ transition. On their signal, we can
upgrade the FTBFS bugs to RC severity.
Cheers,
Dominic (for the perl and pkg-perl teams)
[1] <https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/perl.html>
[2] <https://rt.cpan.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=101962>
[3] <https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=perl-5.22-transition;users=debian-perl@lists.debian.org>
[4] <https://people.debian.org/~dom/perl/test/perl-5.22.0/>
[5] <https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=796798>
[6] <https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=797106>
[7] <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/perl-maintainers/2015-May/004889.html>
[8] <https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=798309>
[9] <https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2015/08/msg00010.html>
Reply to: