Your message dated Fri, 26 Jun 2026 13:04:52 +0200
with message-id <[email protected]>
and subject line Re: Bug#1140142: transition: qtbase-abi-5-15-19
has caused the Debian Bug report #1140142,
regarding transition: qtbase-abi-5-15-19
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [email protected]
immediately.)
--
1140142: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1140142
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: [email protected]
Usertags: transition
Dear Release team,
Qt 5.15.19 is the last release of Qt 5.
I have submitted a merge request with the ben file:
https://salsa.debian.org/release-team/transition-data/-/merge_requests/69
The prepared packages also have the following fixes:
- qtbase: Fix build with OpenSSL 4 (#1137599).
- qtbase: Drop dependency on mysql-defaults (#1137755).
- qtwebengine: Fix build with glibc 2.43 (#1128869).
- qtwebengine: Stop building PDF packages (#1131703).
The transition is prepared in experimental, ready to be uploaded to unstable.
After we are done with this transition, I will focus on removing Qt 5 in favor
of Qt 6.
--
Dmitry Shachnev
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 25/06/2026 18:40, Dmitry Shachnev wrote:
On Thu, Jun 25, 2026 at 04:13:59PM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
I see a few reproducibility issues, see e.g. [1], [2], [3]. Not sure if there
are others. Can you take a look?
Actually let's not touch those for this round, and given you said you'll
work on removing Qt 5, it's probably not worth spending time on that anyway.
OK, thank you.
The qt3d issue looks like is gone after retry.
The qtlocation one is really flaky tests, not a reproducibility issue.
The only real remaining issue is in qtdeclarative, which seems to be a bug in
qdoc. I will drop Qt 5 documentation packages at some point, so we only need
to care about it if it still exists in Qt 6.
I needed quite some hints due to what looks like a britney issue when scheduling
tests, but this has finally migrated. Closing.
Cheers,
Emilio
--- End Message ---
