Bug#798703: wreport: ABI transition needed for libstdc++ v5
This is a friendly ping wrt the libstdc++ ABI transition. Your package is listed as needing a transition but has seen no action. It'd be good to get things going so we can finish the transition soon. Cheers, Emilio
Bug#798703: wreport: ABI transition needed for libstdc++ v5
On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 09:45:06PM +0100, Simon McVittie wrote: > They already left testing, in fact. This RC bug is partly to stop them > getting back in until after the necessary rename (or new upstream > SONAME) has happened. Ok, perfect. Enrico -- GPG key: 4096R/E7AD5568 2009-05-08 Enrico Zini
Bug#798703: wreport: ABI transition needed for libstdc++ v5
On 11/09/15 21:35, Enrico Zini wrote: > Would it be possible to just remove wreport and dballe from testing, so > that no transition will be blocked, and have them move in again when I > upload the new ones? They already left testing, in fact. This RC bug is partly to stop them getting back in until after the necessary rename (or new upstream SONAME) has happened. S
Bug#798703: wreport: ABI transition needed for libstdc++ v5
On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 08:49:55PM +0100, Simon McVittie wrote: > Looking at the build-dependencies of wreport, the only C++ library > seems to be libwibble, which is static (and was already rebuilt). > So this sub-transition is ready to start. > > The package might be NMU'd if there is no maintainer response. The > release team have declared a 2 day NMU delay[2] for packages involved > in the libstdc++ transition, in order to get unstable back to a usable > state in a finite time. Hello, I actually am pretty far in a big refactoring of the library, and all its reverse dependencies, that does not depend on wibble: https://github.com/ARPA-SIMC/wreport/tree/devel I am waiting for ARPA Emilia Romagna (the institution for which I am maintaining the code) to deploy the code into production and have it there for a week or two without big issues, before uploading the new toolchain to Debian. It could be anytime from two weeks to two months, but definitely well in time for stretch. Would it be possible to just remove wreport and dballe from testing, so that no transition will be blocked, and have them move in again when I upload the new ones? Enrico -- GPG key: 4096R/E7AD5568 2009-05-08 Enrico Zini
Bug#798703: wreport: ABI transition needed for libstdc++ v5
Source: wreport Version: 2.14-1 Severity: serious Justification: breaks ABI without a package rename Tags: sid stretch User: debian-...@lists.debian.org Usertags: libstdc++-cxx11 Background[1]: libstdc++6 introduces a new ABI to conform to the C++11 standard, but keeps the old ABI to not break existing binaries. Packages which are built with g++-5 from experimental (not the one from testing/unstable) are using the new ABI. Libraries built from this source package export some of the new __cxx11 or B5cxx11 symbols, dropping other symbols. If these symbols are part of the API of the library, then this rebuild with g++-5 will trigger a transition for the library. In the case of wreport, std::string appears in functions in public headers (for example Var::format), so it seems very likely that a transition is needed. The transition normally consists of renaming the affected library packages, adding a v5 suffix (libwreport2v5). The SONAME should not be changed when doing this. If an upgrade to a new upstream SONAME is already planned, and that SONAME has never been available in Debian compiled with g++-4, then an alternative way to carry out the transition would be to bump the SONAME. These follow-up transitions for libstdc++ are not going through exactly the normal transition procedure, because many entangled transitions are going on at the same time, and the usual ordered transition procedure does not scale that far. When all the C++ libraries on which this library depends have started their transitions in unstable if required, this library should do the same, closing this bug; the release team will deal with binNMUs as needed. Looking at the build-dependencies of wreport, the only C++ library seems to be libwibble, which is static (and was already rebuilt). So this sub-transition is ready to start. The package might be NMU'd if there is no maintainer response. The release team have declared a 2 day NMU delay[2] for packages involved in the libstdc++ transition, in order to get unstable back to a usable state in a finite time. Regards, S [1] https://wiki.debian.org/GCC5#libstdc.2B-.2B-_ABI_transition [2] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2015/08/msg0.html
