On 18/10/2022 11:59, Guillaume Lefranc wrote:
Yes.
The upgrade was automatically done by unattended-upgrades, but we have
libc6 blacklisted due to issues we encountered previously
What kind of issues? Are they still relevant? Is there a bug report we could
look at?
In this case, I suggest you also block/pin libc-bin to the same version as
libc6.
Helmut, libc-bin could have a depends on libcX (>= ${binary:Version}), although
this is such a corner case that I don't think an update is necessary just for this.
Cheers,
Emilio
Unattended-Upgrade::Origins-Pattern {
"origin=Debian,codename=${distro_codename},label=Debian-Security";
};
Unattended-Upgrade::Package-Blacklist {
"libc6";
};
On Tue, 18 Oct 2022 at 09:23, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <po...@debian.org>
wrote:
On 18/10/2022 09:13, Guillaume Lefranc wrote:
Package: libc-bin
Version: 2.28-10+deb10u2
Severity: normal
Dear Maintainer,
after upgrading libc-bin from 2.28-10+deb10u1 to 2.28-10+deb10u2, the
following error appeared after running iconv the following way:
iconv -cs -f 'UTF-8' -t 'UTF-8' /tmp/510754/import/import.1
iconv: relocation error: iconv: symbol __gconv_create_spec version
GLIBC_PRIVATE not defined in file libc.so.6 with link time reference
Any particular reason you upgraded libc-bin but not libc6?
Cheers,
Emilio