Bug#737906: transition: eglibc
On Mon, 2014-02-17 at 18:20 +0000, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On 2014-02-06 21:20, Adam Conrad wrote:
> > Requestion a transition slot to upload eglibc 2.18 to unstable.
> > The number of rdeps with an exact glibc dependency (due to using
> > internal symbols) is quite low, and should all be binNMUable.
>
> Assuming that all we're expecting to be involved is the binNMUs, please
> go ahead (i.e. there aren't a bunch of "FTBFS against eglibc 2.18" bugs
> hiding up your sleeve somewhere :-).
The binNMUs are all scheduled and have mostly built now; we're just
waiting for mipsel to chew through a few large packages which all seem
to have got picked up at the same time.
One problem is libnih's FTBFS on i386 - #739913.
Regards,
Adam
Reply to: