Re: Bug#753444: Bug#753542: perl-base - Segfaults in libperl.so.5.18
On Sat, Jul 05, 2014 at 11:45:16AM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> On 05/07/14 08:48, Niko Tyni wrote:
> I have thought a bit more about this. I was hesitant as there are lots of
> packages involved, but thinking more about it, this should be pretty smooth. You
> add perlapi-5.18.2d to perl-base's Provides, but you won't remove perlapi-5.18.1
> or perlapi-5.18.2. Then perl-base can migrate immediately, and all the rebuilds
> can migrate as well. Then after the rebuilds are done, you can remove
> perlapi-5.18.1 and perlapi-5.18.2 from Provides.
I'm not very enthusiastic about this. It's basically lying: we don't offer
the old ABI anymore so we should be straight about it. An uninstallable
package seems better than a broken one.
But I can see it would help the transition, and it wouldn't cause a
regression, it would just make the fix take longer.
So yes, I can do that if you want.
> > What do we do with packages that fail to build? Remove the old s390x
> > binaries from testing? The source packages are going to cause trouble
> > for the 5.20 transition too, of course...
>
> For leaf packages, we could possibly remove them. But why not just fix them
> wherever possible? Do you expect many FTBFS?
Sure, fixing them is certainly preferrable :) It's just that I've
recently rebuilt the same set of packages for the 5.20 transition and
ISTR encountering quite a few known long-standing FTBFS bugs. I suppose
those packages aren't in testing anymore, though; I didn't look at that
part much in my tests.
--
Niko Tyni ntyni@debian.org
Reply to: