Bug#829145: transition: glibc 2.23
On 04/07/16 00:48, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> On 2016-07-01 09:42, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
>> Control: tags -1 confirmed
>>
>> On 01/07/16 01:41, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
>>> Package: release.debian.org
>>> Severity: normal
>>> User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
>>> Usertags: transition
>>>
>>> Dear release team,
>>>
>>> We would like to get a transition slot for glibc 2.23. It is currently
>>> available in experimental and has been built successfully on all
>>> official architectures except hurd-i386. We have fixed the hurd-i386
>>> failure in out git, and we are working on build failures for alpha, hppa
>>> and sparc64. There are due to testsuite issue, mostly in the math parts
>>> and do not look very critical.
>>>
>>> It should be noted that this upload will make a few packages to FTBFS,
>>> mostly due to more precise checking in the floating-point classification
>>> macros (isnan, isinf, ...). In most of the cases the changes just make
>>> existing bugs visible. The list of affected packages is available [1]
>>> (thanks to Martin Michlmayr), and the bugs have been opened for more
>>> than 3 months.
>>>
>>> As the glibc is using symbol versioning, there is no soname change. That
>>> said a few packages are using libc internal symbols and have to be
>>> rebuilt for this transition:
>>> - apitrace
>>> - bro
>>> - dante
>>> - libnih
>>> - libnss-db
>>> - unscd
>>>
>>> Here is the corresponding ben file:
>>>
>>> title = "glibc";
>>> is_affected = .depends ~ /libc[0-9.]* \(<</;
>>> is_good = .depends ~ /libc[0-9.]* \(<< 2.24\)/;
>>> is_bad = .depends ~ /libc[0-9.]* \(<< 2.23\)/;
>>>
>>> In addition to that, a few new symbols have been added that might
>>> prevent a few other packages to transition to testing if they pick up
>>> the new symbols, namely the fts64_* and the lgamma* ones. It should not
>>> concerns many packages.
>>
>> Go ahead.
>
> It has just been accepted by dak.
binnmus scheduled.
Cheers,
Emilio
Reply to: