Bug#564008: FTBFS: Applying patch kfreebsd/local-no-SOCK_NONBLOCK.diff fails

Package: eglibc Version: 2.10.2-4 Severity: serious Justification: FTBFS Hi Aurélien et al., eglibc unfortunately FTBFS on all non-Linux ports (at least): | Applying patch kfreebsd/local-no-SOCK_NONBLOCK.diff | patching file resolv/res_send.c | Hunk #1 FAILED at 933. | Hunk #2 succeeded at 927

Re: Bug#625521: glibc: causes segfault in Xorg

Michel Dänzer daen...@debian.org (04/05/2011): More importantly xserver-xorg-core-dbg, to get debugging symbols for /usr/lib/xorg/modules/libshadow.so . If fbdev is indeed used (see Michel's other mail about that), rebuilding it with debugging symbols would be nice. AFAICT from a quick grep,

Re: Bug#625521: glibc: causes segfault in Xorg

Michel Dänzer daen...@debian.org (04/05/2011): Those are just callback pointers passed to shadowAdd(). The driver doesn't call shadowUpdatePacked() directly (in fact you'll note the backtrace doesn't have any frames belonging to the driver), but the shadow layer is only used as set up by the

Bug#449423: glibc2.7 followup

Stuart Prescott [EMAIL PROTECTED] (06/11/2007): I know that you know that -- that comment wasn't for you but for the original reporter and […] Next time, trying putting the submitter in the loop, so that he has a chance to even get your message. Cheers, -- Cyril Brulebois pgpTHdzzwkoWT.pgp

Re: Please test eglibc 2.9-23+multiarch.2

Goswin von Brederlow goswin-...@web.de (03/08/2009): Does it break aptitude too? I think that people involved in serious things like multiarch and glibc might appreciate your staying quiet at some point given the quite huge mess you initially created. But maybe that's just me. Mraw, KiBi.

Re: Bug#699818: pre-approval for unblock: eglibc change restricted for GNU/kFreeBSD

Control: tag -1 moreinfo Hi Petr, Petr Salinger petr.salin...@seznam.cz (05/02/2013): Please pre-approve following change for eglibc. The rationale is that setgroups(size, groups) changes egid on kfreebsd, precisely groups[0] is the new egid. initgroups(user, gid) prepares the groups

Re: Bug#740068: debian-installer: segfaults when built against testing

Cyril Brulebois k...@debian.org (2014-02-25): Cyril Brulebois k...@debian.org (2014-02-25): It doesn't seem to happen when building against unstable, but it would be nice to make sure we spot the reason/bugfix and possibly speed up its propagation to testing. I forgot to mention it's

Re: Bug#740068: debian-installer: segfaults when built against testing

Hi, Aurelien Jarno aurel...@aurel32.net (2014-02-25): Yes, we get this bug happening regularly because the binaries on the image went through the library reduction process with a given libc (here 2.18), and later a different version of the libc is unpacked over it (here 2.17). Therefore some

Next d-i alpha release: late June

Hi, I've just checked with Ben, it seems we could be getting a 4.6 kernel suitable for testing (no regressions reported from previous version + mips* FTBFS fix) shortly. We could think about urgenting it into testing and releasing a new d-i early in the week, which seems OK on the -cd side too.

Re: Bug#819685: [Pkg-iscsi-maintainers] Bug#819685: open-iscsi-udeb: please drop libnss-files-udeb dependency

Hi, Christian Seiler (2016-04-02): > Control: tags -1 + confirmed pending > > Thanks for the notification about the glibc change! > > On 03/31/2016 09:23 PM, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > > As of glibc 2.22-5, libnss-files-udeb has been merged into libc-udeb. > > Therefore the

Re: Next d-i alpha release: late June

Hi, Nicholas D Steeves (2016-06-28): > Could someone please tell me what the deadline is for adding expanded > partman-btrfs functionality? My proposal is in a thread on > debian-b...@lists.debian.org, subject: "Re: btrfs subvolume naming > scheme". A résumé of the read is:

Re: Bug#740068: debian-installer: segfaults when built against testing

Hi, Cyril Brulebois <k...@debian.org> (2014-02-25): > Aurelien Jarno <aurel...@aurel32.net> (2014-02-25): > > Yes, we get this bug happening regularly because the binaries on the > > image went through the library reduction process with a given libc (here > > 2.1

Re: Bug#837004: installation-locale: FTBFS: no output file produced because warnings were issued

+ | FAIL: rt/tst-shm | debian/rules.d/build.mk:115: recipe for target '/home/kibi/hack/glibc/glibc-debian.git/stamp-dir/check_libc' failed With upgraded libc packages, installation-locale builds fine again. glibc maintainer: if you agree with this proposed path and patch, please steal this bug

Re: Bug#837004: installation-locale: FTBFS: no output file produced because warnings were issued

Aurelien Jarno <aurel...@aurel32.net> (2017-02-06): > On 2017-02-06 00:50, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Aurelien Jarno <aurel...@aurel32.net> (2017-02-06): > > > Well this kind of patch is not mergeable upstream, so we will have to > >

Re: Bug#837004: installation-locale: FTBFS: no output file produced because warnings were issued

Hi, Aurelien Jarno (2017-02-06): > Well this kind of patch is not mergeable upstream, so we will have to > keep it forever. Or just for stretch given the following points? > What would be wrong in using a supported value for the debian-installer > locale? It should only

Re: Bug#851790: installation-reports: DNS not working

Cyril Brulebois <k...@debian.org> (2017-01-19): > Summing up things from IRC: > - in an uptodate sid chroot (both development version and minimal one >with daily-build script): no DNS issues with the generated mini.iso >(amd64, tested within stable's kvm on amd64).

Re: Bug#851790: installation-reports: DNS not working

Cyril Brulebois <k...@debian.org> (2017-01-19): > You can try downgrading the kernel, but I'd usually look at glibc first > for DNS related issues. Summing up things from IRC: - in an uptodate sid chroot (both development version and minimal one with daily-build script): n

Re: Bug#851790: installation-reports: DNS not working

Steve McIntyre <st...@einval.com> (2017-01-19): > On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 08:57:54AM +0100, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > >On 2017-01-19 01:53, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > > > >> It's been a while since I last looked at/understood mklibs stuff though, > >> fee

Bug#836446: libc6-dev: depends on linux-libc-dev:$arch, breaking debootstrap

Aurelien Jarno (2016-09-03): > clone 836446 -1 > reassign -1 debootstrap > retitle -1 debootstrap: doesn't support arch-qualified dependencies > affects -1 libc6-dev > thanks Thanks for this. > On 2016-09-03 11:28, Sven Joachim wrote: > > Package: libc6-dev > > Version:

Re: Bug#882158: stretch-pu: package glibc/2.24-11+deb9u2

Adam D. Barratt (2017-11-24): > This looks OK to me, but will need a KiBi-ack; CCing. lgtm; apologies for the delay. KiBi. signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Re: busybox sh broken on i386 with glibc 2.26, leads to kernel panic

me for > Debian if it can help the current maintainers. Fixing it ASAP would look good to me (unless you here differently from Chris or Christoph); it would be great to ping upstream to propagate Aurélien's comments too. Cheers, -- Cyril Brulebois (k...@debian.org)<https://debamax.c

Re: Bug#924657: release-notes? Was: Re: kbdnames are generated with incorrect translations

l I've just double checked the effects of the patch and I'll send a separate update, as a follow-up to the initial patch proposal. Cheers, -- Cyril Brulebois (k...@debian.org)<https://debamax.com/> D-I release manager -- Release team member -- Freelance Consultant signature.as

Bug#941853: crypt(3) should be provided by libxcrypt

art again building the udeb with the next upload. Aurelien, Marco, do we need to anticipate any changes on the d-i side? Or will that udeb addition just result in a new dependency from crypt-using udebs to libcrypt1-udeb? Cheers, -- Cyril Brulebois (k...@debian.org)<https://

Bug#941853: crypt(3) should be provided by libxcrypt

B) as libxcrypt provides a bit > more functionality. Perfect, thanks. Cheers, -- Cyril Brulebois (k...@debian.org)<https://debamax.com/> D-I release manager -- Release team member -- Freelance Consultant signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Re: Bug#988740: unblock: glibc/2.31-12

ckages change under our feet when we're in the middle of unentangling the rendering mess isn't exactly nice… Cheers, -- Cyril Brulebois (k...@debian.org)<https://debamax.com/> D-I release manager -- Release team member -- Freelance Consultant signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Re: Bug#988740: unblock: glibc/2.31-12

Hi Paul, Paul Gevers (2021-05-20): > On 20-05-2021 08:23, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > > Having udeb-producing packages change under our feet when we're in > > the middle of unentangling the rendering mess isn't exactly nice… > > I'm terribly sorry, but I thought we dis

Re: Bug#1017777: bullseye-pu: package glibc/2.31-13+deb11u4

tpt usable after multi-threaded fork to prevent Ansible > deadlocks. No objections in principle on the d-i side. Cheers, -- Cyril Brulebois (k...@debian.org)<https://debamax.com/> D-I release manager -- Release team member -- Freelance Consultant signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Bug#1016868: libc6-udeb: dangling ld-linux symlink

.so - after: ./lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 -> /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 Thanks to Aurélien for investigating at the same time as I did, and for the upcoming fix! Cheers, -- Cyril Brulebois (k...@debian.org)<https://debamax.com/> D-I release manager -- Release team member -- Freelance Consultant