On 1/27/21 9:47 PM, Paul Gevers wrote: > Hi Matthias, > > On 26-01-2021 18:57, Matthias Klose wrote: >> I would like to upload binutils version 2.5.2-1 to unstable later this week. >> The >> 2.25.2 release is announced for this weekend ([1]). It imports fixes towards >> the next stable version. >> >> The pending fixes in the package are: >> >> * PR27218, memory access violation in dwarf2dbg.c >> * PR gas/27195, enable DWARF5 support when required >> * PR binutils/27231: Fix parsing DWARF-5 line number tables, >> DWARF-5: Ignore empty range in DWARF-5 line number tables >> >> All these changes also are in 2.36-1 as found in experimental. >> No packaging changes are planned for the upload. > In our freeze policy [1] we requested packages that are part of the > (build-)essential set to stop uploading to unstable. binutils is listed > there [2].
I have been following the way the linux source package was uploaded. Apparently the package entered unstable with just an announcement like this. And more than one time. > """ > If you think changes are needed anyway, please coordinate with the > release team before uploading to unstable. Consider staging changes in > experimental. > """ > > So, can you please clarify why you think these changes are needed? What > are the risks of including or not including these changes? How are the > risks mitigated? staging in experimental is not possible, unless you remove 2.36, or override it bumping the epoch. - PR27218 is an obvious bug fix, avoiding a segfault. - DWARF5 is not enabled by default, the DWARF5 fixes are required for GCC 11 defaulting to use DWARF5. And no, I'm not planning to upload gcc-11 to unstable. I'm very unhappy about the private decision making for some uploads, while showing a pedantic attitude towards others. Not so kind regards, Matthias
