Re: planning to upload binutils 2.35.2
- To: Matthias Klose <doko@debian.org>
- Cc: Debian Release <debian-release@lists.debian.org>
- Subject: Re: planning to upload binutils 2.35.2
- From: Paul Gevers <elbrus@debian.org>
- Date: Mon, 1 Feb 2021 19:57:50 +0100
- Message-id: <[🔎] 85d836db-9832-54b0-4015-a48ae112a6ef@debian.org>
- In-reply-to: <419c5813-fe0e-81f1-7141-6358ad608391@debian.org>
- References: <be58fe5f-b599-8762-f311-37e6dab34f25@debian.org> <08254a2d-48a5-821c-cd34-93186214801a@debian.org> <6ea2371c-5124-34e4-bd10-8481d31a1662@debian.org> <45f30637-1764-3b9b-cd67-7aaebba38064@debian.org> <419c5813-fe0e-81f1-7141-6358ad608391@debian.org>
Hi
On 29-01-2021 12:13, Matthias Klose wrote:
>> We would be happy with either of the following:
>> 1) upload to unstable with PR27218 only
>> 2) upload to experimental first (with a 2.36+really2.35.2 version) to
>> check all is fine.
>
> so I don't see what an upload for 2) would provide you with more information.
It would give us a PASS or a FAIL. Where a PASS would tell us that
apparently it's not the DWARF5 changes that made the glibc autopkgtest
FAIL. A FAIL would tell us to be very suspicious about the change.
Paul
Attachment:
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Reply to: