Bug#866389: transition: perl 5.26
On 22/07/17 10:07, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > On 21/07/17 22:53, Niko Tyni wrote: >> On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 10:19:11AM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: >>> On 20/07/17 22:51, Niko Tyni wrote: Control: block -1 with 869139 On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 09:16:41PM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > On 20/07/17 21:01, Niko Tyni wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 07:51:33PM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: >>> Control: forwarded -1 >>> https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/perl5.26.html >> Please let us know when it would be OK to upload Perl 5.26 to sid. > > Awesome. Now is a good time. I have added some hints for the gsoap and > libprelude transitions, so they don't get entangled with this one. Thanks. I have an upload (almost) ready, but a last minute issue popped up as the fixed syslog-ng-incubator fails to build on s390x. See #869139. Do you want me to hold off because of that? >>> >>> I think we can go ahead and worst case remove it as we were planning to >>> before >>> it got fixed. >> >> Thanks. Uploaded earlier today, noting here for the sake of completeness. > > And binNMUs are scheduled for levels 1 and 2 since yesterday (not without > problems as I forgot that we need --extra-depends here, given perl-base is > installed on the chroots). Things were building fine now, I'll schedule the > rest > of the binNMUs if things are looking fine. binNMUs scheduled for all the rest as well, as things are looking good and the fast architectures are finished or almost finished. Cheers, Emilio
Bug#866389: transition: perl 5.26
On 21/07/17 22:53, Niko Tyni wrote: > On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 10:19:11AM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: >> On 20/07/17 22:51, Niko Tyni wrote: >>> Control: block -1 with 869139 >>> >>> On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 09:16:41PM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: On 20/07/17 21:01, Niko Tyni wrote: > On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 07:51:33PM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: >> Control: forwarded -1 >> https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/perl5.26.html >>> > Please let us know when it would be OK to upload Perl 5.26 to sid. Awesome. Now is a good time. I have added some hints for the gsoap and libprelude transitions, so they don't get entangled with this one. >>> >>> Thanks. I have an upload (almost) ready, but a last minute issue popped >>> up as the fixed syslog-ng-incubator fails to build on s390x. See #869139. >>> >>> Do you want me to hold off because of that? >> >> I think we can go ahead and worst case remove it as we were planning to >> before >> it got fixed. > > Thanks. Uploaded earlier today, noting here for the sake of completeness. And binNMUs are scheduled for levels 1 and 2 since yesterday (not without problems as I forgot that we need --extra-depends here, given perl-base is installed on the chroots). Things were building fine now, I'll schedule the rest of the binNMUs if things are looking fine. Cheers, Emilio
Bug#866389: transition: perl 5.26
On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 10:19:11AM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > On 20/07/17 22:51, Niko Tyni wrote: > > Control: block -1 with 869139 > > > > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 09:16:41PM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > >> On 20/07/17 21:01, Niko Tyni wrote: > >>> On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 07:51:33PM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > Control: forwarded -1 > https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/perl5.26.html > > > >>> Please let us know when it would be OK to upload Perl 5.26 to sid. > >> > >> Awesome. Now is a good time. I have added some hints for the gsoap and > >> libprelude transitions, so they don't get entangled with this one. > > > > Thanks. I have an upload (almost) ready, but a last minute issue popped > > up as the fixed syslog-ng-incubator fails to build on s390x. See #869139. > > > > Do you want me to hold off because of that? > > I think we can go ahead and worst case remove it as we were planning to before > it got fixed. Thanks. Uploaded earlier today, noting here for the sake of completeness. -- Niko
Bug#866389: transition: perl 5.26
On 20/07/17 22:51, Niko Tyni wrote: > Control: block -1 with 869139 > > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 09:16:41PM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: >> On 20/07/17 21:01, Niko Tyni wrote: >>> On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 07:51:33PM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: Control: forwarded -1 https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/perl5.26.html > >>> Please let us know when it would be OK to upload Perl 5.26 to sid. >> >> Awesome. Now is a good time. I have added some hints for the gsoap and >> libprelude transitions, so they don't get entangled with this one. > > Thanks. I have an upload (almost) ready, but a last minute issue popped > up as the fixed syslog-ng-incubator fails to build on s390x. See #869139. > > Do you want me to hold off because of that? I think we can go ahead and worst case remove it as we were planning to before it got fixed. Cheers, Emilio
Bug#866389: transition: perl 5.26
Control: block -1 with 869139 On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 09:16:41PM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > On 20/07/17 21:01, Niko Tyni wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 07:51:33PM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > >> Control: forwarded -1 > >> https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/perl5.26.html > > Please let us know when it would be OK to upload Perl 5.26 to sid. > > Awesome. Now is a good time. I have added some hints for the gsoap and > libprelude transitions, so they don't get entangled with this one. Thanks. I have an upload (almost) ready, but a last minute issue popped up as the fixed syslog-ng-incubator fails to build on s390x. See #869139. Do you want me to hold off because of that? -- Niko Tyni nt...@debian.org
Bug#866389: transition: perl 5.26
Control: tags -1 confirmed On 20/07/17 21:01, Niko Tyni wrote: > On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 07:51:33PM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: >> Control: forwarded -1 >> https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/perl5.26.html >> >> On 29/06/17 14:07, Niko Tyni wrote: >>> Package: release.debian.org >>> User: release.debian@packages.debian.org >>> Usertags: transition >>> X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-p...@lists.debian.org >>> >>> We'd like to get Perl 5.26 in sid/buster soonish. > >> Nice. Let us know when things are better. Currently there's not much going on >> and we could do the perl transition without problems if you were ready. But >> let's evaluate again when things are improved. > > Hi, we're now ready to go. The only known blocker left is #826473 in > kdesrc-build, which can be removed from testing. We just did a one last > rebuild test of the packages that will need a binnmu, and found no new > issues. > > Many kudos to all the maintainers who fixed their packages, and to Gregor > who fixed the rest :) > > Please let us know when it would be OK to upload Perl 5.26 to sid. Awesome. Now is a good time. I have added some hints for the gsoap and libprelude transitions, so they don't get entangled with this one. go go go! Emilio
Bug#866389: transition: perl 5.26
On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 07:51:33PM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > Control: forwarded -1 > https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/perl5.26.html > > On 29/06/17 14:07, Niko Tyni wrote: > > Package: release.debian.org > > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > > Usertags: transition > > X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-p...@lists.debian.org > > > > We'd like to get Perl 5.26 in sid/buster soonish. > Nice. Let us know when things are better. Currently there's not much going on > and we could do the perl transition without problems if you were ready. But > let's evaluate again when things are improved. Hi, we're now ready to go. The only known blocker left is #826473 in kdesrc-build, which can be removed from testing. We just did a one last rebuild test of the packages that will need a binnmu, and found no new issues. Many kudos to all the maintainers who fixed their packages, and to Gregor who fixed the rest :) Please let us know when it would be OK to upload Perl 5.26 to sid. -- Niko Tyni nt...@debian.org
Bug#866389: transition: perl 5.26
On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 10:51:53AM +0200, gregor herrmann wrote: > On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 10:43:30 +1000, Paul Wise wrote: > > > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 5:04 AM, gregor herrmann wrote: > > > #867213: syslog-ng-incubator: one rdep (syslog-ng). No reaction on > > > the bug report, unrelated build failure; I guess syslog-ng* > > > can be removed from testing if noone fixes the problem in > > > time. > > I'd like to point out that DSA relies on syslog-ng on debian.org > > hosts, so it would be appreciated if the issues could be fixed or > > worked around rather than removing syslog-ng from buster. Of course > > buster is not in use on any debian.org hosts yet. > > Good news: Some hours ago the maintainer added a note about a local > fix to the bug log and tagged the bug pending. Indeed. I'd also like to point out that the package failing to build in sid is src:syslog-ng-incubator, not syslog-ng itself. The binary packages that risk testing removal due to this are syslog-ng-mod-trigger syslog-ng-mod-rss syslog-ng-mod-basicfuncs-plus syslog-ng-mod-lua syslog-ng-mod-perl syslog-ng-mod-date syslog-ng-mod-grok syslog-ng-mod-kafka syslog-ng-mod-zmq -- Niko Tyni nt...@debian.org
Bug#866389: transition: perl 5.26
On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 10:43:30 +1000, Paul Wise wrote: > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 5:04 AM, gregor herrmann wrote: > > #867213: syslog-ng-incubator: one rdep (syslog-ng). No reaction on > > the bug report, unrelated build failure; I guess syslog-ng* > > can be removed from testing if noone fixes the problem in > > time. > I'd like to point out that DSA relies on syslog-ng on debian.org > hosts, so it would be appreciated if the issues could be fixed or > worked around rather than removing syslog-ng from buster. Of course > buster is not in use on any debian.org hosts yet. Good news: Some hours ago the maintainer added a note about a local fix to the bug log and tagged the bug pending. Cheers, gregor -- .''`. https://info.comodo.priv.at/ - Debian Developer https://www.debian.org : :' : OpenPGP fingerprint D1E1 316E 93A7 60A8 104D 85FA BB3A 6801 8649 AA06 `. `' Member of VIBE!AT & SPI, fellow of the Free Software Foundation Europe `- BOFH excuse #286: Telecommunications is downgrading.
Bug#866389: transition: perl 5.26
On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 5:04 AM, gregor herrmann wrote: > #867213: syslog-ng-incubator: one rdep (syslog-ng). No reaction on > the bug report, unrelated build failure; I guess syslog-ng* > can be removed from testing if noone fixes the problem in > time. I'd like to point out that DSA relies on syslog-ng on debian.org hosts, so it would be appreciated if the issues could be fixed or worked around rather than removing syslog-ng from buster. Of course buster is not in use on any debian.org hosts yet. -- bye, pabs https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
Bug#866389: transition: perl 5.26
On Fri, 14 Jul 2017 22:52:49 +0300, Niko Tyni wrote: > On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 10:50:16AM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > > > > Thanks. Please go ahead and bump them to severity:serious as we are close to > > doing this. > > Thanks, done. Update re blocking bugs: In a couple of hours the last 4 NMUs will leave DELAYED. The remaining buggy packages, already targetted for auto-removal, then are: #826473: kdesrc-build: no rdepends, can be removed from testing (or maybe even from the archive, according to the bug log). #867213: syslog-ng-incubator: one rdep (syslog-ng). No reaction on the bug report, unrelated build failure; I guess syslog-ng* can be removed from testing if noone fixes the problem in time. So I think from the point of view of blockers we are basically ready. Cheers, gregor -- .''`. https://info.comodo.priv.at/ - Debian Developer https://www.debian.org : :' : OpenPGP fingerprint D1E1 316E 93A7 60A8 104D 85FA BB3A 6801 8649 AA06 `. `' Member of VIBE!AT & SPI, fellow of the Free Software Foundation Europe `- signature.asc Description: Digital Signature
Bug#866389: transition: perl 5.26
On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 10:50:16AM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > On 02/07/17 19:04, Dominic Hargreaves wrote: > > On Sun, Jul 02, 2017 at 05:01:20PM +0200, gregor herrmann wrote: > >> On Fri, 30 Jun 2017 12:39:09 +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > >> > >>> We need to distinguish among blockers and non-blockers in that list. E.g., > >>> "fails to run with perl 5.26" is a blocker, but "uses a deprecated > >>> feature" is > >>> not. > >> > >> Just for clarification, most of the bugs which have "deprecated" in > >> the title will fail to run with 5.26; IOW: the warnings are from > >> 5.24, and in 5.26 the issues become fatal. > > > > I've retitled those bugs would could be confusing in this regard. I > > believe that all the bugs which severity: important are the ones which > > would become RC when we decide we want to start soon. > > > > Noting for completeness that Niko has added the other lockers on > > architecture: all related FTBFS bugs as requested by Emilio. > > Thanks. Please go ahead and bump them to severity:serious as we are close to > doing this. Thanks, done. -- Niko
Bug#866389: transition: perl 5.26
On 02/07/17 19:04, Dominic Hargreaves wrote: > On Sun, Jul 02, 2017 at 05:01:20PM +0200, gregor herrmann wrote: >> On Fri, 30 Jun 2017 12:39:09 +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: >> >>> We need to distinguish among blockers and non-blockers in that list. E.g., >>> "fails to run with perl 5.26" is a blocker, but "uses a deprecated feature" >>> is >>> not. >> >> Just for clarification, most of the bugs which have "deprecated" in >> the title will fail to run with 5.26; IOW: the warnings are from >> 5.24, and in 5.26 the issues become fatal. > > I've retitled those bugs would could be confusing in this regard. I > believe that all the bugs which severity: important are the ones which > would become RC when we decide we want to start soon. > > Noting for completeness that Niko has added the other lockers on > architecture: all related FTBFS bugs as requested by Emilio. Thanks. Please go ahead and bump them to severity:serious as we are close to doing this. Cheers, Emilio
Bug#866389: transition: perl 5.26
On Sun, Jul 02, 2017 at 05:01:20PM +0200, gregor herrmann wrote: > On Fri, 30 Jun 2017 12:39:09 +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > > > We need to distinguish among blockers and non-blockers in that list. E.g., > > "fails to run with perl 5.26" is a blocker, but "uses a deprecated feature" > > is > > not. > > Just for clarification, most of the bugs which have "deprecated" in > the title will fail to run with 5.26; IOW: the warnings are from > 5.24, and in 5.26 the issues become fatal. I've retitled those bugs would could be confusing in this regard. I believe that all the bugs which severity: important are the ones which would become RC when we decide we want to start soon. Noting for completeness that Niko has added the other lockers on architecture: all related FTBFS bugs as requested by Emilio. Cheers, Dominic.
Bug#866389: transition: perl 5.26
On Fri, 30 Jun 2017 12:39:09 +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > We need to distinguish among blockers and non-blockers in that list. E.g., > "fails to run with perl 5.26" is a blocker, but "uses a deprecated feature" is > not. Just for clarification, most of the bugs which have "deprecated" in the title will fail to run with 5.26; IOW: the warnings are from 5.24, and in 5.26 the issues become fatal. Cheers, gregor -- .''`. https://info.comodo.priv.at/ - Debian Developer https://www.debian.org : :' : OpenPGP fingerprint D1E1 316E 93A7 60A8 104D 85FA BB3A 6801 8649 AA06 `. `' Member of VIBE!AT & SPI, fellow of the Free Software Foundation Europe `- NP: Solomon Burke: Flesh And Blood signature.asc Description: Digital Signature
Bug#866389: transition: perl 5.26
On 30/06/17 12:28, Niko Tyni wrote: > On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 04:39:21PM +0100, Dominic Hargreaves wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 03:07:39PM +0300, Niko Tyni wrote: >>> Package: release.debian.org >>> User: release.debian@packages.debian.org >>> Usertags: transition >>> X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-p...@lists.debian.org >>> >>> We'd like to get Perl 5.26 in sid/buster soonish. >>> >>> As usual, we've done test rebuilds of packages build dependending on perl. >>> Things are looking pretty good. Known issues are at >>> >>> >>> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=perl-5.26-transition;users=debian-p...@lists.debian.org >>> >>> and should be marked as blockers of this bug next. >> >> Previously we only used blockers to track FTBFS in packages needing >> binNMUing - so far I have just added those. I think it probably makes >> sense to keep with that, as the above link give you the full picture >> when needed. We need to distinguish among blockers and non-blockers in that list. E.g., "fails to run with perl 5.26" is a blocker, but "uses a deprecated feature" is not. So don't add all the bugs as blockers, but adding some in that list (the ones that will be RC when the transition starts) would make sense. > Fine by me of course. Should we also mark possible unrelated sid FTBFS > bugs of those packages as blockers? ISTR us doing that in the past. Yes please. Cheers, Emilio
Bug#866389: transition: perl 5.26
On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 04:39:21PM +0100, Dominic Hargreaves wrote: > On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 03:07:39PM +0300, Niko Tyni wrote: > > Package: release.debian.org > > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > > Usertags: transition > > X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-p...@lists.debian.org > > > > We'd like to get Perl 5.26 in sid/buster soonish. > > > > As usual, we've done test rebuilds of packages build dependending on perl. > > Things are looking pretty good. Known issues are at > > > > > > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=perl-5.26-transition;users=debian-p...@lists.debian.org > > > > and should be marked as blockers of this bug next. > > Previously we only used blockers to track FTBFS in packages needing > binNMUing - so far I have just added those. I think it probably makes > sense to keep with that, as the above link give you the full picture > when needed. Fine by me of course. Should we also mark possible unrelated sid FTBFS bugs of those packages as blockers? ISTR us doing that in the past. (I'm not aware of any such bugs at the moment, but we should probably do one more full binNMU test rebuild sweep in addition of the incremental ones we're doing currently.) -- Niko
Bug#866389: transition: perl 5.26
Control: forwarded -1 https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/perl5.26.html On 29/06/17 14:07, Niko Tyni wrote: > Package: release.debian.org > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > Usertags: transition > X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-p...@lists.debian.org > > We'd like to get Perl 5.26 in sid/buster soonish. Great! > As usual, we've done test rebuilds of packages build dependending on perl. > Things are looking pretty good. Known issues are at > > > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=perl-5.26-transition;users=debian-p...@lists.debian.org > > and should be marked as blockers of this bug next. > > We'll ping this bug when things are ready, but please let us know if > you have any preference about the timing. Nice. Let us know when things are better. Currently there's not much going on and we could do the perl transition without problems if you were ready. But let's evaluate again when things are improved. > It might be prudent to decouple the move to versioned Provides (see > #758100 and the thread at [1]) from the rest of the transition and do > it with 5.24 in sid first. I hope to have time for that next week. Cool. Yeah, I'd prefer to do that first. Cheers, Emilio
Bug#866389: transition: perl 5.26
On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 03:07:39PM +0300, Niko Tyni wrote: > Package: release.debian.org > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > Usertags: transition > X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-p...@lists.debian.org > > We'd like to get Perl 5.26 in sid/buster soonish. > > As usual, we've done test rebuilds of packages build dependending on perl. > Things are looking pretty good. Known issues are at > > > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=perl-5.26-transition;users=debian-p...@lists.debian.org > > and should be marked as blockers of this bug next. Previously we only used blockers to track FTBFS in packages needing binNMUing - so far I have just added those. I think it probably makes sense to keep with that, as the above link give you the full picture when needed. > We'll ping this bug when things are ready, but please let us know if > you have any preference about the timing. Indeed, it might be worth having debconf as a target? > It might be prudent to decouple the move to versioned Provides (see > #758100 and the thread at [1]) from the rest of the transition and do > it with 5.24 in sid first. I hope to have time for that next week. > > [1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2017/06/msg00236.html +1 to that! Cheers, Dominic.
Bug#866389: transition: perl 5.26
Package: release.debian.org User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: transition X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-p...@lists.debian.org We'd like to get Perl 5.26 in sid/buster soonish. As usual, we've done test rebuilds of packages build dependending on perl. Things are looking pretty good. Known issues are at https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=perl-5.26-transition;users=debian-p...@lists.debian.org and should be marked as blockers of this bug next. We'll ping this bug when things are ready, but please let us know if you have any preference about the timing. It might be prudent to decouple the move to versioned Provides (see #758100 and the thread at [1]) from the rest of the transition and do it with 5.24 in sid first. I hope to have time for that next week. [1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2017/06/msg00236.html -- Niko Tyni nt...@debian.org
