On Mon, Jan 08, 2024 at 12:35:32AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > Package: perl > Version: 5.36.0-10 > Severity: normal > Tags: patch > User: ubuntu-de...@lists.ubuntu.com > Usertags: origin-ubuntu noble ubuntu-patch > > Hi Niko, Dominic, > > Please find attached a prospective patch for perl that would annotate the > perlapi provides for perl-base after a 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit > architectures, on perl 5.36.0. I've tested that this does what's expected, > both for the Provides: of perl-base and the behavior of dh_perl.
Thanks! Glad the perlabi thing is still working. It hasn't had much use. > It tries to retain compatibility with perlapi-5.36.0 on architectures where > this is appropriate (64-bit architectures + i386); it covers Debian release > architectures + riscv64, but does not attempt to be complete for all > architectures dpkg knows about. Is there a reason you're bumping the abi for all the architectures rather than just the affected ones? I'd expect this to be "opt in" so perlabi would be defined just for armhf, hppa and so forth. I'm thinking something like what we did for the s390x jmp_buf thing ifeq (s390x-linux-gnu,$(shell dpkg-architecture -qDEB_HOST_GNU_TYPE)) perlabi = 5.18.2d else perlabi = endif as per https://salsa.debian.org/perl-team/interpreter/perl/-/commit/a66f196c13108b04909f9ec0e05986983cb2ed19 > This is entirely optional anyway, as perl > 5.38 is just around the corner, at which point this patch should be dropped > completely (assuming time_t lands before perl 5.38 does). TBH I was hoping 5.38 would land first :) I'm just waiting for a transition slot. (Hm, it's been a month now, guess I should ping the bug.) OOC, have you got the perl test suite passing with time64? I just did a quick try on i386 with just DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=abi=+time64 and I'm seeing Failed 7 tests out of 2623, 99.73% okay. ../cpan/DB_File/t/db-btree.t ../cpan/DB_File/t/db-hash.t ../cpan/DB_File/t/db-recno.t ../cpan/DB_File/t/db-threads.t ../cpan/Memoize/t/errors.t ../cpan/Memoize/t/tie.t porting/libperl.t but I guess that's because things like libdb5.3 need to be rebuilt first? -- Niko
