Your message dated Sun, 18 May 2025 10:34:16 +0200 with message-id <bc8e67f9-5dec-4f72-ab56-7814b99abb66@debian.org> and subject line Re: Bug#1093859: release.debian.org: status of mips64el for trixie has caused the Debian Bug report #1093859, regarding release.debian.org: status of mips64el for trixie to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 1093859: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1093859 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
- To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>
- Subject: release.debian.org: mips64el vs. librsvg needs resolving for trixie
- From: Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org>
- Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2025 14:32:26 +0000
- Message-id: <Z5JS-nZ2pIv3ZWUq@remnant.pseudorandom.co.uk>
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal Tags: trixie X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-mips@lists.debian.org, debian-gtk-gnome@lists.debian.org, debian-boot@lists.debian.org The current version of librsvg is not migrating to testing because it FTBFS on mips64el. This appears to be caused by a kernel or hardware issue where otherwise-working code fails with EFAULT in a read() call on bookworm kernels (see #1093200): this is not librsvg-specific, and affects other Rust components, as well as git, Erlang and Go. Presumably something in the Rust and Go ecosystem is making use of a function-calling pattern that is more likely to trigger this than typical C/C++ code, but I don't know the full details. buster kernels (as used on the mips64el porterbox and some older buildds) do not seem to be affected. Indications from the bug are that bullseye kernels (5.10) might also be unaffected, at least for git (I don't think the rust packages have necessarily been tried there). It is unknown whether trixie/bookworm-backports kernels are affected. This seems to have been happening for about 6 months (since 2024-08-15), although until recently it was possible to mitigate it by retrying builds until they got scheduled on a buildd that happened to be using a buster kernel. Is the mips porting team actively looking into this, for example attempting to reproduce it on similar hardware with bookworm-backports kernels? Or, is the release team perhaps already considering demoting mips64el to non-release status? If there is no prospect of a fix, and if mips64el is still a release architecture, then we will need to remove librsvg from mips64el so that it isn't holding all other architectures back. A quick experiment with `dak rm -R -n` says this would involve architecture-specific removals of around 250 packages (plus whatever depends on those packages, recursively). It might also require sourceful changes in some of the affected packages, to add a Build-Depends on a package from librsvg (where there is not one already), to ensure they don't get rebuilt on mips64el until librsvg is buildable again. In particular removing librsvg would mean we lose a build-dependency of debian-installer from mips64el (-boot cc'd) which would make mips64el into another upgradable-but-not-installable architecture with no installer, like armel and i386. Other Rust/Erlang/Go packages are likely to be in a similar situation, but most of them are higher up the dependency stack (less key) than librsvg, so removing them might be less painful. smcv
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
- To: 1093859-done@bugs.debian.org
- Cc: YunQiang Su <syq@debian.org>, debian-mips@lists.debian.org
- Subject: Re: Bug#1093859: release.debian.org: status of mips64el for trixie
- From: Paul Gevers <elbrus@debian.org>
- Date: Sun, 18 May 2025 10:34:16 +0200
- Message-id: <bc8e67f9-5dec-4f72-ab56-7814b99abb66@debian.org>
- In-reply-to: <Z_pB_HtftIC-ytyJ@remnant.pseudorandom.co.uk>
- References: <Z5JS-nZ2pIv3ZWUq@remnant.pseudorandom.co.uk> <Z5JS-nZ2pIv3ZWUq@remnant.pseudorandom.co.uk> <ec26441d-3b96-415e-bcd9-bbbdc4c0c3bb@debian.org> <Z_lheJFIR7v1gyZx@ramacher.at> <Z5JS-nZ2pIv3ZWUq@remnant.pseudorandom.co.uk> <Z_pB_HtftIC-ytyJ@remnant.pseudorandom.co.uk>
Hi, On 12-04-2025 12:35, Simon McVittie wrote:While that specific bug did eventually get fixed, it seems concerning that it had to be maintainers of affected packages who raised the alarm about this, rather than the porting team noticing that there was a more general problem. It also seems concerning that #1093200 was eventually fixed by a maintainer of a different affected package rather than by the mips64el porting team - it doesn't seem healthy for ports to be kept alive by individual heroics from someone who doesn't even have the relevant hardware.Indeed. The lack of response to several queries and in particular to our final warning [1] has made us decide that mips64el will not be an official trixie architecture. This has just been announced on d-d-a [2].Paul [1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1100544#89[2] https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/E1uGZLq-00149a-1V@respighi.debian.orgAttachment: OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
--- End Message ---