Hi Emilio, On 2017-11-17 18:14, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > Control: forwarded -1 > https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/glibc-2.25.html > Control: tags -1 confirmed > > Hi Aurelien, > > On 15/11/17 21:27, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > > Package: release.debian.org > > Severity: normal > > User: release.debian....@packages.debian.org > > Usertags: transition > > > > Dear release team, > > > > I would like to get a transition slot for glibc 2.25. It is available > > in experimental for more than two months, and there is no known > > regression. It is currently available in experimental and has been built > > successfully on all official architectures. For the debian-ports > > architectures the situation is not good as it this version has never > > been built successfully on alpha and powerpcspe. That said that can be > > fixed later and I don't think we should block the transition on that. > > > > As the glibc is using symbol versioning, there is no soname change. That > > said a few packages are using libc internal symbols and have to be > > rebuilt for this transition: > > - apitrace > > - bro > > - dante > > - libnih > > - libnss-db > > - p11-kit > > - unscd > > > > Here is the corresponding ben file: > > title = "glibc"; > > is_affected = .depends ~ /libc[0-9.]* \(<</; > > is_good = .depends ~ /libc[0-9.]* \(<< 2.26\)/; > > is_bad = .depends ~ /libc[0-9.]* \(<< 2.25\)/; > > > > In addition a few new symbols have been added that might prevent a few > > other packages to migrate to testing until glibc migrates if they pick > > up the new symbols. Most of them are libm.so to add support for > > TS 18661-1:2014 math functions, but are currently unlikely to be picked > > up by some packages. On the libc.so side, the explicit_bzero, > > gententropy and getrandom might be picked up by a few packages. > > Let's do this.
Thanks, I have just uploaded it to sid. Aurelien -- Aurelien Jarno GPG: 4096R/1DDD8C9B aurel...@aurel32.net http://www.aurel32.net