Hi all,
There are still many critical, grave and serious bugs listed in BTS
against glibc. Should we try to fix some of them? :-)
Critical:
* #162551: libc6-sparc64 conflicts with fakeroot
Package: libc6-sparc64; Severity: critical; Reported by: Julian Stoev
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; 64 days old.
This is a woody bug. BenC's proposed fix is:
] The fix will be to make libc6-sparc64 conflict with gcc-3.0,
] gcc-3.0-sparc64 and older fakeroot.
This also requires that a new version of fakeroot be uploaded for
woody-proposed-updates
* #165358: libc6 2.3.1-1 breaks fetchmail/exim (and others?)
Package: libc6; Severity: critical; Reported by: Rene Engelhard
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; 43 days old.
This one is about whether to provide things like __libc_waitpid and
__libc_fork temporarily for transition purposes. We should decide one
way or another and either add the aliases or close the bug :-)
* #165374: =?iso-8859-15?q?Breaks_when_upgrading_to_2=2E3=2E1?=
Package: libc6-dbg; Severity: critical; Reported by:
=?iso-8859-15?q?Per_Lundberg?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; 43 days old.
If /usr/lib/debug is in your /etc/ld.so.conf, then installing the new
glibc fails. mdz writes:
] I would be quite surprised if this were the only thing to break in this
] situation [...]
] This bug does not, in my opinion, warrant Severity: critical, if it is a
] bug at all.
I'd tend to agree -- this is not a "typical" setup.
* #166967: libc6: upgrade of libc6 may have broken jabber 1.4.2 server
Package: libc6; Severity: critical; Reported by: John M Flinchbaugh
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Tags: sid; 31 days old.
Someone else had followed up to say that the problem is no longer seen
with a newer jabber; suggest we close this.
* #167794: Wrong Pre-Depends
Package: libc6; Severity: critical; Reported by: Martin Schulze
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; 25 days old.
Looks like this might be a problem in the buildd setup? There's not
enough information in the bug to say, and I'm not sure why this is
assigned to glibc.
* #169790: libc6: installation failure on dist-upgrade
Package: libc6; Severity: critical; Reported by: Forrest Cahoon
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; 10 days old.
postinst fails when some of the packages being checked are not installed
(I think). This was reported against 2.3.1-4. Has this been fixed?
* #170635: libc6 2.3.1-3 to 2.3.1-5 upgrade breaks
Package: libc6; Severity: critical; Reported by: Magnus Danielson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
Appears to be unreproducible; more info needed. Also appears to be
isolated, maybe we should downgrade this.
Grave functionality bugs - outstanding
(A list of all such bugs used to be available).
* #165699: php4: apache segfault w/ php4 and mysql,imap loaded together related to
#165563
Package: libc6; Severity: grave; Reported by: David Raufeisen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Tags: sid; merged with #165718, #165719; 40 days old.
* #165718: php4-imap: apache segmentation fault when starting php4-imap module
Package: libc6; Severity: grave; Reported by: Debian User
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Tags: sid; merged with #165699, #165719; 40 days old.
* #165719: php4 possibly causes apache to stop functioning
Package: libc6; Severity: grave; Reported by: Michel Lobert
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Tags: sid; merged with #165699, #165718; 40 days old.
* #166414: apache: Apache non-functional after upgrade
Package: libc6; Severity: grave; Reported by: Tony Hoyle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
Tags: sid; 35 days old.
All these appear to be somehow related. Not sure what's the deal here
yet.
* #169789: libc6: postinst broken: uninstallable if you upgrade from a version
older than 2.2.94-1
Package: libc6; Severity: grave; Reported by: Marco Nenciarini
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Tags: patch, sid; 10 days old.
This one has been fixed. I'm going to close this bug.
* #169818: libc6: runlevel can return =?iso-8859-1?q?=ABunknown=BB?=, which breaks
restarts
Package: libc6; Severity: grave; Reported by: Tollef Fog Heen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
10 days old.
Has this one been fixed yet? Seems like a trivial fix.
* #170385: libc6 should conflict with wine (<< 0.0.20021007-1) and perhaps other
packages
Package: libc6; Severity: grave; Reported by: Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; 7 days old.
This is related to __libc_fork(). The submitter wants glibc to conflict
with older wine. Do we ever do package-specific conflicts for libc?
Seems like that would be difficult to maintain. Seems like this really
is a wine issue; can we close/reassign this?
Serious policy violations - outstanding
(A list of all such bugs used to be available).
* #167909: Patch for s390 build problems
Package: glibc; Severity: serious; Reported by: Gerhard Tonn
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; 24 days old.
* #169919: FTBFS on s390
Package: glibc; Severity: serious; Reported by: Gerhard Tonn
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; 9 days old.
Looks like these ones are already in cvs. I'll mark them 'pending'.
* #170507: glibc: header goofup on hppa breaks XFree86 compilation
Package: glibc; Severity: serious; Reported by: Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
Tags: help.
Carlos is looking at this one I think.
randolph
--
Randolph Chung
Debian GNU/Linux Developer, hppa/ia64 ports
http://www.tausq.org/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
