On 01/09/2017 02:13 PM, James Cowgill wrote:
> On 09/01/17 10:51, Julien Cristau wrote:
>> On 01/08/2017 11:40 PM, Matthias Klose wrote:
>>> On 08.01.2017 14:29, Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer wrote:
>>>> Matthias: this bug is stopping a lot of packages from migrating and in
>>>> so near the freeze is hurting many teams (and their users!) like the
>>>> one, so I'm planning to NMU it to the last working version.
>>>> Do we know which was the last version to properly work on mips*? Is there
>>>> drawback in going back to that version?
>>>> Of course if you have a better course of action suitable for a fast fix,
>>>> be glad to read it.
>>> Please don't. I'm fine to apply work arounds for port architectures, but
>>> for release architectures (I didn't decide on this status). The binutils
>>> plan was announced last June , and I plan to stick to it. At least one
>>> the mips toolchain maintainers (out of the five who committed to in the
>>> architecture qualification process) seems to address RC issues, and
>>> according to
>>> the upstream issue, there's work in progress.
>> Work in progress is not enough. This has been filed almost two months
>> ago, and keeping an RC issue in the toolchain open for this long right
>> around freeze time is irresponsible on your part, so please don't block
>> others fixing it if you don't want to apply a workaround yourself. (I'm
>> also disappointed that none of the mips porters saw fit to get this
>> fixed in sid sooner.)
> As a MIPS porter, I'm not really sure what more I could have done about
> this bug. I provided a patch in November and it still hasn't been fixed
> in Debian. I do not control upstream binutils and cannot make them
> commit anything. Occasionally I've been pinging Maciej, but nothing has
> happened (though he cannot be blamed for the situation Debian finds
> itself in). What was I supposed to do?
Either convince Matthias to apply a fix to Debian's binutils package, or