Bug#986602: unblock: mkvtoolnix/54.0.0-2
On 08 avril 2021 20:29, Sebastian Ramacher wrote: [...] > We prefer not to use tpu for such cases. This issue can be fixed via unstable > by reverting to 52.0.0 with the +really dance as well. So there is no > need to upload the fix via tpu. OK, 54.0.0+really52.0.0-1 uploaded to unstable. Christian
Bug#986602: unblock: mkvtoolnix/54.0.0-2
On 2021-04-08 17:45:41 +0200, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: > On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 05:34:40PM +0200, Sebastian Ramacher wrote: > > * Mark #986520 as bullseye-ignore and if a there is a need to fix > > another issues in a bullsey-pu upload, switch CXX to g++-9 in that > > upload. From what I understand, this workaround is supposed to also > > work for 52.0.0. > > Something like that usually is approved for a p-u, as release team > member is your right to decide what to tag bullseye-ignore, but that > would also pretty much hide the bugs from the list of bullseye bugs. If > you really went down that route I'd rather see you use your usertags to > hide it from the udd view only during the release process rather tha > ignore it forever. > And, since this is p-u material in stable, couldn't one upload > 52.0.0-1+deb11u1 to t-p-u just changing CXX? We prefer not to use tpu for such cases. This issue can be fixed via unstable by reverting to 52.0.0 with the +really dance as well. So there is no need to upload the fix via tpu. Cheers > > -- > regards, > Mattia Rizzolo > > GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18 4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540 .''`. > More about me: https://mapreri.org : :' : > Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri `. `'` > Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia `- -- Sebastian Ramacher signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#986602: unblock: mkvtoolnix/54.0.0-2
On 08 avril 2021 19:13, Christian Marillat wrote: > On 08 avril 2021 17:45, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: > >> On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 05:34:40PM +0200, Sebastian Ramacher wrote: >>> * Mark #986520 as bullseye-ignore and if a there is a need to fix >>> another issues in a bullsey-pu upload, switch CXX to g++-9 in that >>> upload. From what I understand, this workaround is supposed to also >>> work for 52.0.0. >> >> Something like that usually is approved for a p-u, as release team >> member is your right to decide what to tag bullseye-ignore, but that >> would also pretty much hide the bugs from the list of bullseye bugs. If >> you really went down that route I'd rather see you use your usertags to >> hide it from the udd view only during the release process rather tha >> ignore it forever. >> And, since this is p-u material in stable, couldn't one upload >> 52.0.0-1+deb11u1 to t-p-u just changing CXX? > > Really good idea and probably the best solution. > > If release team agree, should I upload to unstable or t-p-u ? Answer to myself t-p-u Christian
Bug#986602: unblock: mkvtoolnix/54.0.0-2
On 08 avril 2021 17:45, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: > On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 05:34:40PM +0200, Sebastian Ramacher wrote: >> * Mark #986520 as bullseye-ignore and if a there is a need to fix >> another issues in a bullsey-pu upload, switch CXX to g++-9 in that >> upload. From what I understand, this workaround is supposed to also >> work for 52.0.0. > > Something like that usually is approved for a p-u, as release team > member is your right to decide what to tag bullseye-ignore, but that > would also pretty much hide the bugs from the list of bullseye bugs. If > you really went down that route I'd rather see you use your usertags to > hide it from the udd view only during the release process rather tha > ignore it forever. > And, since this is p-u material in stable, couldn't one upload > 52.0.0-1+deb11u1 to t-p-u just changing CXX? Really good idea and probably the best solution. If release team agree, should I upload to unstable or t-p-u ? Christian
Bug#986602: unblock: mkvtoolnix/54.0.0-2
On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 05:34:40PM +0200, Sebastian Ramacher wrote: > * Mark #986520 as bullseye-ignore and if a there is a need to fix > another issues in a bullsey-pu upload, switch CXX to g++-9 in that > upload. From what I understand, this workaround is supposed to also > work for 52.0.0. Something like that usually is approved for a p-u, as release team member is your right to decide what to tag bullseye-ignore, but that would also pretty much hide the bugs from the list of bullseye bugs. If you really went down that route I'd rather see you use your usertags to hide it from the udd view only during the release process rather tha ignore it forever. And, since this is p-u material in stable, couldn't one upload 52.0.0-1+deb11u1 to t-p-u just changing CXX? -- regards, Mattia Rizzolo GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18 4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540 .''`. More about me: https://mapreri.org : :' : Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri `. `'` Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia `- signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#986602: unblock: mkvtoolnix/54.0.0-2
Control: tags -1 moreinfo On 2021-04-07 23:12:01, Christian Marillat wrote: > Package: release.debian.org > Severity: normal > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > Usertags: unblock > > Please unblock package mkvtoolnix > > This package was stuck in unstable since january 2021 due to gcc-10 bugs > (See #980429 and #986520). > > I was waiting for a new gcc-10 release to unstable but the gcc-10 maintainer > tell me today : > > Please work around it by using gcc-9 for bullseye. I'm not going to > cherry-pick single patches from the branch. > > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=986520#15 > > I know that we have 52.0.0-1 in testing and I did new uploads (53 and 54) > when testing was not hard frozen and now I'm unable to upload a 52.0.0-2 > package build with gcc-9 to unstable, this explain the 54.0.0-2 upload. > > I've not seen any bug with 54.0.0-2 and this package is safe for me. > > unblock mkvtoolnix/54.0.0-2 The diff between testing and unstable is: 746 files changed, 89826 insertions(+), 59919 deletions(-) That doesn't appear to be an upstream release with only targetted fixes. I'm also quite surprised that new upstream releases were uploaded to unstable while gcc-10 was not fixed. Indeed, all builds starting from 52.0.0-2 to 54.0.0-1 failed on amd64, i386, mipsel, ppc64el (on the other architectures some of them failed, but not all). So here we are. Possbile courses for action: * Implement non-trivial autopkgtests that test the functionality of the installed binaries. The new upstream releases would still not comply with the freeze policy, but we wouldn't block it in this stage of the freeze. * Mark #986520 as bullseye-ignore and if a there is a need to fix another issues in a bullsey-pu upload, switch CXX to g++-9 in that upload. From what I understand, this workaround is supposed to also work for 52.0.0. Cheers -- Sebastian Ramacher
Bug#986602: unblock: mkvtoolnix/54.0.0-2
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock Please unblock package mkvtoolnix This package was stuck in unstable since january 2021 due to gcc-10 bugs (See #980429 and #986520). I was waiting for a new gcc-10 release to unstable but the gcc-10 maintainer tell me today : Please work around it by using gcc-9 for bullseye. I'm not going to cherry-pick single patches from the branch. https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=986520#15 I know that we have 52.0.0-1 in testing and I did new uploads (53 and 54) when testing was not hard frozen and now I'm unable to upload a 52.0.0-2 package build with gcc-9 to unstable, this explain the 54.0.0-2 upload. I've not seen any bug with 54.0.0-2 and this package is safe for me. unblock mkvtoolnix/54.0.0-2
