I have a bug tagged serious in the package libevent I maintain [1], I've
been told the solution is to start a transition workflow.
As mentioned in the transition doc [2], I uploaded the fixed package in experimental, but I'm wondering what does "Check the auto-generated "auto-<source>"" mean.
Will my package appear on this list automatically or after I request a transition slot from the release team?
[1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1023284
[2] https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/ReleaseTeam/Transitions
Hi Nicholas
On Sun, 6 Nov 2022 at 23:51, Nicolas Mora <nicolas@babelouest.org> wrote:
I have a bug tagged serious in the package libevent I maintain [1], I've been told the solution is to start a transition workflow.
As mentioned in the transition doc [2], I uploaded the fixed package in experimental, but I'm wondering what does "Check the auto-generated "auto-<source>"" mean.
Will my package appear on this list automatically or after I request a transition slot from the release team?
It should appear on the list automatically, but it won't because the libevent-2.1-7 package name did not change. I suggest that you follow
what Ubuntu did [3] and bump the SONAME and package name for this
transition.
[1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1023284
[2] https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/ReleaseTeam/Transitions
Regards
Graham
[3] https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libevent/2.1.12-stable-5ubuntu1
Is that really worth the effort for this one missing symbol? I'd just
make sure that is stays around regardless of glibc version.
This patch wouldn't work as intended, as we'd mix arc4random functions
from the vendored sources and from glibc,
each set having their own internal static data.
A test rebuild of reverse-dependencies was done in Ubuntu, and the
transition went ahead.
Hi Sebastian
On Mon, 7 Nov 2022 at 08:58, Sebastian Ramacher <sramacher@debian.org> wrote:
Is that really worth the effort for this one missing symbol? I'd just
make sure that is stays around regardless of glibc version.
There was a patch proposed in the corresponding Ubuntu bug [1], re-introducing the symbol, however there was a concern from schopin
(see comment #4):
This patch wouldn't work as intended, as we'd mix arc4random functions
from the vendored sources and from glibc,
each set having their own internal static data.
A test rebuild of reverse-dependencies was done in Ubuntu, and the
transition went ahead.
Regards
Graham
[1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/debian/+source/libevent/+bug/1990941
On 2022-11-07 11:44:31 +0100, Graham Inggs wrote:
Hi Sebastian
On Mon, 7 Nov 2022 at 08:58, Sebastian Ramacher <sramacher@debian.org> wrote:
Is that really worth the effort for this one missing symbol? I'd just make sure that is stays around regardless of glibc version.
There was a patch proposed in the corresponding Ubuntu bug [1], re-introducing the symbol, however there was a concern from schopin
(see comment #4):
This patch wouldn't work as intended, as we'd mix arc4random functions from the vendored sources and from glibc,
each set having their own internal static data.
So let's use the glibc provided one over the internal copy. I don't see
the issue. With the rather non-trivial set of libevent reverse
dependencies, I'd like to avoid a lock step transition.
I was also told to change the package name, it would also make the
package cleaner.
So uploading to experimental with the name libevent-2.1-12 instead of libevent-2.1-7 would do it? Let's go with it then.
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 442 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 26:20:54 |
Calls: | 9,152 |
Calls today: | 3 |
Files: | 13,433 |
Messages: | 6,043,222 |