Hi all,
Quoting Steve Langasek (2023-07-19 23:27:21)
[snip]
> The "good" news is that, although there are over 1500 -dev packages yet to
> be analyzed, we have prioritized libraries based on the number of
> reverse-dependencies and therefore these 1500 -dev packages have among them
> less than
On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 12:30:50AM +0100, Simon McVittie wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Jul 2023 at 14:27:21 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > to understand the impact that a change to the size of
> > time_t will have on a library's ABI, it must be possible to compile the
> > headers that expose that API
>
On Wed, 19 Jul 2023 at 14:27:21 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> to understand the impact that a change to the size of
> time_t will have on a library's ABI, it must be possible to compile the
> headers that expose that API
Would the results of this analysis also be suitable for telling
interested
Hi folks,
Two months ago, I posted with a proposal for how to handle a transition to
64-bit time_t on 32-bit archs in the trixie cycle.
https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2023/05/msg00168.html
We have pretty good consensus on the path forward; however, at the time I
posted I had hoped to
4 matches
Mail list logo
