Hello Sebastian anb Paul,

> So let's not just rebuild those. Samuel, please file bugs against those
> packages so that the maintainers fix the build dependencies.

I have filled bugs already, here's the current situation:

eg25-manager:
https://bugs.debian.org/1043547
Has been fixed in git already, so the next upload will have the correct B-D.

llvm-toolchain-14 and llvm-toolchain-15:
https://bugs.debian.org/1043550
https://bugs.debian.org/1043551

I have not explicitly asked for the B-D change for llvm, and I think
doing it so will be a waste of time and effort, let me explain.
Both llvm-toolchain-14 and llvm-toolchain-15 will be removed from the
archive soon, see their ROM bugs:
https://bugs.debian.org/1050069
https://bugs.debian.org/1050070

On top of that, those two packages have already been rebuilt for
riscv64 (no binNMUs required there), whereas if we force another
upload only to solve this, we will trigger a build for every arch and
needlessly consume at the very least 77 hours of the riscv builders'
time (while we are still rebuilding the archive for riscv, delaying it
all).
https://buildd.debian.org/status/logs.php?pkg=llvm-toolchain-14&arch=riscv64
https://buildd.debian.org/status/logs.php?pkg=llvm-toolchain-15&arch=riscv64

Do you think that's a sensible compromise?
I'm asking to proceed with binNMUs because eg25-manager has been fixed
in git already and the llvm packages are about to be removed (although
I want curl to migrate before that), also rebuilding them on riscv
takes a lot of effort at a not-so-great time (no binNMUs required for
riscv).

Note: llvm-toolchain-16, which is going to be the new default, has
already fixed the B-D and the package has been uploaded, so that's why
there's no action for that one.

Thank you,

-- 
Samuel Henrique <samueloph>

Reply via email to