Bug#704032: transition: boost-defaults
On 9 May 2013 08:40, Matthias Klose <doko@debian.org> wrote:
> Am 09.05.2013 05:39, schrieb Steve M. Robbins:
>> On May 8, 2013 12:05:39 PM Julien Cristau wrote:
>>> On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 23:08:15 -0500, Steve M. Robbins wrote:
>>>> I would like to change Debian's default boost version from 1.49 to
>>>> 1.53 or later -- likely to the most current Boost at the time the
>>>> transition is scheduled. This change does not directly impact any
>>>> binary packages. However, it will affect the buildability of source
>>>> packages.
>>>
>>> Do we know how many (and which) packages would start FTBFS if the change
>>> was done now?
>>
>>
>> Dmitrijs: did you do a full rebuild of the archive using Boost 1.53? If so,
>> can you post your results here?
>
I did a full rebuild before starting, but those results are not as
relevant any more due to the sheer amount of issues fixed. The best
buildability estimate at the moment is:
http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/transitions/boost1.53.html
Which is still transition in progress. Please note a few issues that
are still open in debian, have been uploaded into ubuntu:
* http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=704044 ( ogre
transition, closed in error, now reopened )
* http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=704045 ( qt4 moc fix )
* http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=701288 ( example of
underlinking)
I have yet to see a gcc4.8 specific FTBFS that has not been filed in
debian BTS or otherwise known (for example as the case is with
aptitude
boost-thread dependency on boost-system and dropping of "-mt" compat
symlinks are the "biggest" problems so far.
My current plan to is to continue process with the transition, now
that I am back & file bugs with patches.
All bugs so far are marked as blocking this transition. IMHO it's
easier to schedule binNMUs rather than uploading patches to transition
things.
And I will do a new proper rebuild soonish.
Regards,
Dmitrijs.
Reply to: