Bug#1000472: bullseye-pu: package rustc-mozilla/1.51.0+dfsg1-1~deb11u1
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
Tags: bullseye
User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
Usertags: pu
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
SRM,
In preparing the rustc 1.51 upload/backport (to support backports of the
latest firefox-esr and thunderbird packages) it has been suggested that
to avoid some issues associated with providing a significant new version
of rustc in the rustc binary package (along with the associated library
packages), that I prepare the 1.51 rustc package with a different name.
Following the model of what was done for gcc, nasm, and nodejs, I was
considering source package rustc-mozilla with a single binary package
(also rustc-mozilla) to ensure that rdeps don't end up getting surprised
by a new rustc. Would this be considered acceptable for the bullseye
and buster uploads of rustc 1.51?
(I intend to file a separate bug for buster-pu once I receive some
direction via this bug.)
Regards,
- -Roberto
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----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=i90C
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: