On 2024-10-05 08:04:48 +0200, Sylvestre Ledru wrote: > > Le 04/10/2024 à 23:52, Sebastian Ramacher a écrit : > > On 2024-09-15 21:05:46 +0200, Sylvestre Ledru wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > > > Le 15/09/2024 à 20:11, Sebastian Ramacher a écrit : > > > > To move forward in this regard, we would like to ask the LLVM > > > > maintainers to provide us with a plan for trixie. Which llvm-toolchain > > > > versions are you planning to release with? Which llvm-toolchain version > > > > should be the default version (llvm-defaults is currently pointing to > > > > 16). If we are aware of your plans, we can help with getting reverse > > > > dependencies to migrate or in the worst case removed from testing. > > > I would like to upgrade llvm-defaults to 19 when it 19.1.0 is released > > > (in a > > > few weeks) > > Okay, let's do that then. But … > > > > > And starts to fill bugs when it is done > > … have these bugs been filed? > > Sorry, by "it", i meant uploaded!
This was a little to fast with llvm-toolchain-19 not being in testing yet. With filing bugs I also meant bugs for failures from a test rebuild with 19 as default. Sorry for being inprecise. It's too late now. I will wait until llvm-toolchan-19 migrated to testing and then will schedule binNMUs. But let's continue this discussion in the other bug. > I filled a lot of bugs to move away from 17 already > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1081250 > > > Also, please file a transition bug against > > release.debian.org to track this change. > > Done and uploaded! > > Could you please remove the block on 1081194 to make sure llvm-toolchain--19 > can moves to testing? I meant to close the bug with my last mail. Doing it now. Cheers -- Sebastian Ramacher
