Your message dated Wed, 22 May 2013 12:26:05 +0200 with message-id <20130522102605.GQ12846@radis.cristau.org> and subject line Re: Bug#708092: transition: eglibc has caused the Debian Bug report #708092, regarding transition: eglibc to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 708092: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=708092 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
- To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>
- Subject: transition: eglibc
- From: Aurelien Jarno <aurel32@debian.org>
- Date: Mon, 13 May 2013 08:08:16 +0200
- Message-id: <[🔎] 20130513060816.5981.18410.reportbug@volta.aurel32.net>
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org Usertags: transition The eglibc transition has already started, but given a few packages have to be rebuilt against the new libc, I thought it was a good idea to open a bug. The packages using private glibc symbols (with GLIBC_PRIVATE versioning) get a strong dependency on the major libc version, ie something like libc6 (>> 2.13), libc6 (<< 2.14). These packages should be rebuild against the new eglibc to get the new dependency libc6 (>> 2.17), libc6 (<< 2.18). These are the following source packages: - dante - db1-compat - libnih - libnss-db - unscd Ben file: title = "eglibc"; is_affected = (.depends ~ "libc[0136\.]* (<< 2.14)") | (.depends ~ "libc[0136\.]* (<< 2.18)") is_good = .depends ~ "libc[0136\.]* (<< 2.18)" is_bad = .depends ~ "libc[0136\.]* (<< 2.14)" -- System Information: Debian Release: 7.0 APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Kernel: Linux 3.8-1-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=fr_FR.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=fr_FR.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
- To: Aurelien Jarno <aurel32@debian.org>, 708092-done@bugs.debian.org
- Subject: Re: Bug#708092: transition: eglibc
- From: Julien Cristau <jcristau@debian.org>
- Date: Wed, 22 May 2013 12:26:05 +0200
- Message-id: <20130522102605.GQ12846@radis.cristau.org>
- In-reply-to: <[🔎] 20130513060816.5981.18410.reportbug@volta.aurel32.net>
- References: <[🔎] 20130513060816.5981.18410.reportbug@volta.aurel32.net>
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 08:08:16 +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > The eglibc transition has already started, but given a few packages have > to be rebuilt against the new libc, I thought it was a good idea to > open a bug. > > The packages using private glibc symbols (with GLIBC_PRIVATE versioning) > get a strong dependency on the major libc version, ie something like > libc6 (>> 2.13), libc6 (<< 2.14). These packages should be rebuild > against the new eglibc to get the new dependency libc6 (>> 2.17), > libc6 (<< 2.18). > eglibc | 2.17-3 | testing | source Cheers, JulienAttachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
--- End Message ---