Hi Aurelien, On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 11:26 AM Aurelien Jarno <aurel...@aurel32.net> wrote: > > Hi, > > On 2020-08-14 00:18, Balint Reczey wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I plan landing 2.32 in Ubuntu in the next weeks and I'd happily > > contribute to the Debian packaging as well. > > Thanks! > > > The Ubuntu packaging repository is at: > > https://code.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-core-dev/ubuntu/+source/glibc/+git/glibc > > > > There is a also staging one with WIP branches: > > https://code.launchpad.net/~rbalint/ubuntu/+source/glibc/+git/glibc > > Before starting packaging 2.32, we need to do the nsl and rpc > transitions, that's why nothing has been started on 2.32 yet. I think > that has to be done in 2 steps: > - nsl transition: packaging libnsl [1] and libnss-nis [2] and build > glibc without --enable-obsolete-nsl. I have started working on libnsl, > but unfortunately all rdeps don't build. I have stopped working on > that this week, I think I'll find some time to work on that next > week, then I'll push my work to git. > - rpc transition: we need to package rpcsvc-proto and build without > --enable-obsolete-rpc. I have also starting working on that, but then > realized we have to take care of nsl first.
I agree that splitting the tasks ahead to three steps minimizes impact at any given during the transitions but also makes the overall impact staying with us longer. In Ubuntu we would like to have 2.32 in 20.10, thus I'm aiming at doing the transition with the 2.32 switch. If you have WIP packages you would be kind enough to share them on Salsa I'd happily help with those, too. Otherwise I'll need to go ahead and package them from scratch, too, to start testing the transition in a PPA. > > On Salsa there is no branch yet for 2.32 as I see and I'm wondering if > > there is a git repository which accepts merge proposals. > > > > I think setting up CI on Salsa would also be useful, at least I use it > > for most of my packages. > > We haven't enabled MR on salsa as nobody really monitors it and we don't > want things to bitrot there. We can enable it, but it should not become > a duplication of the BTS. I'd happily open MRs and open bugs referring to them as the proposed patches. I've forked the glibc repository but I can't enable CI for my fork presumably because it is not enabled in the original repo either. Could you please enable CI setting the configuration file to debian/gitlab-ci.yml or something else under debian/ ? This should not impact the main repo since the config file is not present but would let me experiment in my fork. > > Aurelien, I'd also be interested in the rpcsvc-proto package you > > mentioned earlier [1] and I'd start maintaining it if Josue is not > > interested immediately. > > Let's wait a bit from a possible answer from Josue given it's a holiday > period. I'll happily hand over the packages to Josue if he is interested, but next week I need to start testing the rpcsvc-proto package and if you could share the initial packaging that would help a bit and would not harm anyone I think . Cheers, Balint > > Cheers, > Aurelien > > [1] https://github.com/thkukuk/libnsl > [2] https://github.com/thkukuk/libnss_nis > > -- > Aurelien Jarno GPG: 4096R/1DDD8C9B > aurel...@aurel32.net http://www.aurel32.net -- Balint Reczey Ubuntu & Debian Developer
