Hi Kurt,

On 12/10/16 22:47, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 09:33:43PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
>> On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 09:42:59PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
>>> On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 09:31:17PM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
>>>> On 11/06/16 20:59, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
>>>>> OpenSSL will soon release a new upstream version with a new
>>>>> soname.  This new version will break various packages, see:
>>>>> https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2016/06/msg00205.html
>>>>> I'm currently not sure when the release will be ready.  I would
>>>>> like to start this transition as soon as possible, but probably
>>>>> after it's actually released.  I don't expect this to take long.
>>>> 405 packages failed to build during your test rebuild AFAICS. That's going 
>>>> to
>>>> take some time to sort out...
>>>>> If I'm ready to upload it to unstable, can I start this
>>>>> transition?  Are there things you want me to do?
>>>> Please upload to experimental first and let us know when that's happened.
>>> It's in experimental already.  The test suite only fails
>>> on hurd, for some reason it's not finding the engine.  I still
>>> need to look at that.
>>>> We will also need bugs filed, with severity important for now.
>>> Sure, I'll start on that if I find the time.
>>>> Also it may be useful if you can get us the intersection between the 
>>>> packages
>>>> that failed to build and the key packages[1] (see "Final list of 3302 key 
>>>> source
>>>> packages" in that file).
>>> That actually seem to be 3247 source package.  Anyway, the list is
>>> below.
>> So OpenSSL 1.1.0 was released about 3 weeks ago.  Since then we've
>> been working on the key packages, to get them to build with
>> OpenSSL 1.1.0.  You can see that status of that at:
>> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=openssl-1.1-trans-keypkg;users=pkg-openssl-devel-requ...@lists.alioth.debian.org
>> Most of the packages are really trivial to fix, but some do
>> require that you fix the same issues in many different places and
>> it can take some time to fix it.
>> I would like to motivate more people to work on this by either
>> marking those bugs as RC, or uploading it to unstable.
> Ping.

I'm sorry but I'm going to have to nack this for Stretch, as much as I like to
approve transitions and get new stuff in. I have looked at the opened bugs and
I'm afraid this still is too disruptive. I have noticed that you have forwarded
some of them and sent patches, and I appreciate that. We can do this early in
the Buster cycle, so let's look at the status of this and prepare for the
transition when Stretch gets released.


Reply via email to