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

status of ruby1.9 on hppa



Dear Security team,

we need your input on the ruby1.9/hppa situation (documented in
#478717).

Problem:
Ruby 1.9 is the current "development" version of Ruby. It is supposed
to become the "stable" version in december. It works well on all arches
except hppa.
ruby1.9 isn't autobuildable on lenny: it triggers a kernel issue, likely
to be caused by hppa's partial NPTL support. The result is a few kernel
backtraces, and sometimes a kernel panic.

Current status:
ruby1.9 is in lenny. It is likely that the current (outdated)
version was hand-built by a porter. It is possible to build the current
unstable version using a 2.6.22.19 kernel. (that has been done, but the
version hasn't been uploaded so far).

Possible solutions:

(A) accept the hand-built packages into lenny. When a security update
for ruby1.9 will be necessary, that update will have to be hand-built on
hppa, on a machine with a suitable kernel.

(B) drop ruby1.9 on hppa. That requires NMUing a dozen of packages that
depend or build-depend on ruby1.9, including rrdtool, to either drop the
dependancy on ruby1.9 on hppa, or drop it completely on all arches.

(C) drop hppa as a release arch. After all, there are no active porter
except people willing to provide access to systems (which is nice, but
clearly not enough to keep hppa in a reasonable state), no
developer-accessible machine admined by DSA, a 2.6.26 SMP kernel that
doesn't boot, etc.

== Relevant threads:
on -release, with list of packages that would need to be NMUed:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2008/07/msg00298.html
subthread about the kernel issues:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2008/07/msg00391.html
on -hppa, about releasing lenny with hppa (or not):
http://lists.debian.org/debian-hppa/2008/07/msg00044.html

So, security team, what do you want?

In the meantime, I'll start to implement (A) (ie, uploading an
hand-built ruby1.9, and the other missing ruby packages on hppa). This
is not a regression from the the current situation (outdated ruby1.9
packages that can crash the buildd anyway).
-- 
| Lucas Nussbaum
| lucas@lucas-nussbaum.net   http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ |
| jabber: lucas@nussbaum.fr             GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F |

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: