On Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 9:30 AM Mathias Krause wrote:
> That works for me. The 32-bit time_t transition Jeremy mentioned seems
> like a good candidate to force a rebuild of a lot of packages. Is there
> an ETA for it? I found [1] which mentions to do the transition in
> January but we've March
On 11.03.24 00:41, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> On Thu, 2024-03-07 at 11:48 +0100, Mathias Krause wrote:
>> To get rid of the over-alignment, a rebuild with a linker that
>> doesn't enforce the overly huge alignment any more is sufficient.
>> In Debian terms that would be anything starting with
On Thu, 2024-03-07 at 11:48 +0100, Mathias Krause wrote:
>
> To get rid of the over-alignment, a rebuild with a linker that
> doesn't enforce
> the overly huge alignment any more is sufficient. In Debian terms
> that would be
> anything starting with buster.
>
> I, thereby, request to rebuild
On Thu, Mar 7, 2024 at 6:06 AM Mathias Krause wrote:
> I, thereby, request to rebuild affected packages.
We are rebuilding thousands of packages for the ongoing 32-bit time_t
transition. Maybe you can propose this again after the rebuilds for
that are finished?
Thank you,
Jeremy Bícha
Dear Debian developers,
I've filled a few individual bugs[1,2,3,4] but Emilio suggested, to bring up
the topic here for effectiveness and coordination.
Triggered by a blog post[5], I started to look into some of my Debian amd64
based systems and noticed, certain binaries and libraries have an
5 matches
Mail list logo
