Hi, On 2026-08-26 09:59, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, Aug 24, 2026 at 01:46:45PM -0400, Andres Salomon wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Chromium has been carrying patches to make it work with llvm-toolchain-19, > > and I've uploaded llvm-toolchain-22 to stable-proposed-updates (and pochu > > already uploaded llvm-toolchain-22 to oldstable-pu and oldoldstable-pu) in > > order to be able to drop those patches as well as use a newer rustc. I > > didn't realize (mea culpa) that I needed to ask for an exception from the > > wanna-build team in order to have security buildds use packages from s-pu. > > Can we please have an exception for llvm-toolchain-22 in s-pu for the > > security buildds? llvm-toolchain-22 only supports static linking, so > > anything that builds against it shouldn't end up with any binary package > > dependencies on libc++1(-19/-22) or anything like that. > > > > Note that I have a pending security update (151.0.7922.173-1~deb13u1) that > > was already uploading and build-deps on llvm-toolchain-22. The equivalent > > bookworm-security (deb12u1) release already built, but the trixie-security > > version is still being given back on the security buildds due to lack of > > llvm-toolchain-22. So there is a bit of urgency in getting either an ACK or > > NACK to this request. > > We are not sure if that felt through the cracks, and excuse if the > ping follows too shortly (I realize it is only two days passing). > > I see two options, eithr stable-proposed-updates is enabled for > security builds temporarily until chromium is done (I guess we should > not have it longer, vs. as we discussed for -updates).
I have just done the change to enable stable-proposed-updates for security builds in the buildd configuration (pending puppet propagation). Sorry for the delay. Regards Aurelien -- Aurelien Jarno GPG: 4096R/1DDD8C9B [email protected] http://aurel32.net
