Bug#388708: 388708: might want to hurry this along
On Mon, Oct 09, 2006 at 10:55:22PM +0200, Michael Vogt wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 07, 2006 at 08:27:51AM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote:
> > Quoting Ross Boylan (ross@biostat.ucsf.edu):
> > > http://bjorn.haxx.se/debian/testing.pl?package=apt says
> > > trying to update apt from 0.6.46 to 0.6.46.1 (candidate is 2 days old)
> > > * apt is only 2 days old. It must be 10 days old to go in.
> > > * apt is in freeze; contact debian-release if update is needed
> > > The second point suggests the fix will not go into testing without some
> > > help; the first point suggests it would take 10 days if handled
> > > automatically.
> > > It might be good to get this into testing sooner rather than later,
> > > since it fixes an RC bug.
> > Yes. The upload should probably have been high urgency. But maybe
> > Michael had some reasons for using low. After all, we are in freeze
> > but we still have time to make stuff migrate to testing.
> The problem with automatic migration to etch is that we don't fully
> know the effects of Bug#390189 yet. The root of the problem is
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29289
> The g++ version in etch is not affected by this g++ problem, the
> version in sid is. This means that its probably not a good idea to
> just let apt migrate to testing. We may have to build it with the
> testing g++ and upload it to t-p-u :/ But lets hope that gcc upstream
> has some more information about it.
AIUI, the ABI incompatibility is unidirectional, and shipping a libapt-pkg
built with the new g++-4.1 together with the old g++-4.1 shouldn't cause any
problems. Do you have a reason to believe otherwise?
Thanks,
--
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
vorlon@debian.org http://www.debian.org/
Reply to: