Re: time_t transition and bugs

2024-03-03 Thread Otto Kekäläinen
Thanks Steve for uploading a fixed curl on Saturday. Just checking did you notice amel/armhf are still not building due to secondary issues and n dependencies? https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=curl

Re: time_t transition and bugs

2024-03-03 Thread Steve Langasek
On Sat, Mar 02, 2024 at 10:37:33PM +0500, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote: > On Sat, Mar 02, 2024 at 06:34:43AM -0700, Antonio Russo wrote: > > There's a similar issue with versioned dependencies by un-transitioned > > packages have on non-t64 libraries (e.g., libqt5sql5). > It's not similar, it's caused

Re: time_t transition and bugs

2024-03-02 Thread Andrey Rahmatullin
On Sat, Mar 02, 2024 at 06:34:43AM -0700, Antonio Russo wrote: > There's a similar issue with versioned dependencies by un-transitioned > packages have on non-t64 libraries (e.g., libqt5sql5). It's not similar, it's caused by some t64 libraries having wrong Provides. I've filed bugs about this on

time_t transition and bugs

2024-03-02 Thread Antonio Russo
Hello! I decided to jump into unstable to see the status of the time_t transition. There is currently an issue that seems to have not made any progress in the last few upload cycles. Specifically, some of the t64 renames are being reverted by several packages (e.g. util-linux), leaving