Debian Bug report logs - #866389
transition: perl 5.26

Toggle useless messages

Message #5 received at submit@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Niko Tyni <ntyni@debian.org>

To: submit@bugs.debian.org

Subject: transition: perl 5.26

Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2017 15:07:39 +0300

Package: release.debian.org
User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
Usertags: transition
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-perl@lists.debian.org

We'd like to get Perl 5.26 in sid/buster soonish.

As usual, we've done test rebuilds of packages build dependending on perl.
Things are looking pretty good. Known issues are at

 https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=perl-5.26-transition;users=debian-perl@lists.debian.org

and should be marked as blockers of this bug next.

We'll ping this bug when things are ready, but please let us know if
you have any preference about the timing.

It might be prudent to decouple the move to versioned Provides (see
#758100 and the thread at [1]) from the rest of the transition and do
it with 5.24 in sid first. I hope to have time for that next week.

 [1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2017/06/msg00236.html

-- 
Niko Tyni   ntyni@debian.org

Message #14 received at 866389@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Dominic Hargreaves <dom@earth.li>

To: Niko Tyni <ntyni@debian.org>, 866389@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#866389: transition: perl 5.26

Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2017 16:39:21 +0100

On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 03:07:39PM +0300, Niko Tyni wrote:
> Package: release.debian.org
> User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
> Usertags: transition
> X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-perl@lists.debian.org
> 
> We'd like to get Perl 5.26 in sid/buster soonish.
> 
> As usual, we've done test rebuilds of packages build dependending on perl.
> Things are looking pretty good. Known issues are at
> 
>  https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=perl-5.26-transition;users=debian-perl@lists.debian.org
> 
> and should be marked as blockers of this bug next.

Previously we only used blockers to track FTBFS in packages needing
binNMUing - so far I have just added those. I think it probably makes
sense to keep with that, as the above link give you the full picture
when needed.

> We'll ping this bug when things are ready, but please let us know if
> you have any preference about the timing.

Indeed, it might be worth having debconf as a target?

> It might be prudent to decouple the move to versioned Provides (see
> #758100 and the thread at [1]) from the rest of the transition and do
> it with 5.24 in sid first. I hope to have time for that next week.
> 
>  [1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2017/06/msg00236.html

+1 to that!

Cheers,
Dominic.

Message #19 received at 866389@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <pochu@debian.org>

To: Niko Tyni <ntyni@debian.org>, 866389@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#866389: transition: perl 5.26

Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2017 19:51:33 +0200

Control: forwarded -1 https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/perl5.26.html

On 29/06/17 14:07, Niko Tyni wrote:
> Package: release.debian.org
> User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
> Usertags: transition
> X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-perl@lists.debian.org
> 
> We'd like to get Perl 5.26 in sid/buster soonish.

Great!

> As usual, we've done test rebuilds of packages build dependending on perl.
> Things are looking pretty good. Known issues are at
> 
>  https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=perl-5.26-transition;users=debian-perl@lists.debian.org
> 
> and should be marked as blockers of this bug next.
> 
> We'll ping this bug when things are ready, but please let us know if
> you have any preference about the timing.

Nice. Let us know when things are better. Currently there's not much going on
and we could do the perl transition without problems if you were ready. But
let's evaluate again when things are improved.

> It might be prudent to decouple the move to versioned Provides (see
> #758100 and the thread at [1]) from the rest of the transition and do
> it with 5.24 in sid first. I hope to have time for that next week.

Cool. Yeah, I'd prefer to do that first.

Cheers,
Emilio

Message #26 received at 866389@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Niko Tyni <ntyni@debian.org>

To: Dominic Hargreaves <dom@earth.li>

Cc: 866389@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#866389: transition: perl 5.26

Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2017 13:28:33 +0300

On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 04:39:21PM +0100, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 03:07:39PM +0300, Niko Tyni wrote:
> > Package: release.debian.org
> > User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
> > Usertags: transition
> > X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-perl@lists.debian.org
> > 
> > We'd like to get Perl 5.26 in sid/buster soonish.
> > 
> > As usual, we've done test rebuilds of packages build dependending on perl.
> > Things are looking pretty good. Known issues are at
> > 
> >  https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=perl-5.26-transition;users=debian-perl@lists.debian.org
> > 
> > and should be marked as blockers of this bug next.
> 
> Previously we only used blockers to track FTBFS in packages needing
> binNMUing - so far I have just added those. I think it probably makes
> sense to keep with that, as the above link give you the full picture
> when needed.

Fine by me of course. Should we also mark possible unrelated sid FTBFS
bugs of those packages as blockers? ISTR us doing that in the past.

(I'm not aware of any such bugs at the moment, but we should probably do
one more full binNMU test rebuild sweep in addition of the incremental
ones we're doing currently.)
-- 
Niko

Message #31 received at 866389@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <pochu@debian.org>

To: Niko Tyni <ntyni@debian.org>, 866389@bugs.debian.org, Dominic Hargreaves <dom@earth.li>

Subject: Re: Bug#866389: transition: perl 5.26

Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2017 12:39:09 +0200

On 30/06/17 12:28, Niko Tyni wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 04:39:21PM +0100, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 03:07:39PM +0300, Niko Tyni wrote:
>>> Package: release.debian.org
>>> User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
>>> Usertags: transition
>>> X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-perl@lists.debian.org
>>>
>>> We'd like to get Perl 5.26 in sid/buster soonish.
>>>
>>> As usual, we've done test rebuilds of packages build dependending on perl.
>>> Things are looking pretty good. Known issues are at
>>>
>>>  https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=perl-5.26-transition;users=debian-perl@lists.debian.org
>>>
>>> and should be marked as blockers of this bug next.
>>
>> Previously we only used blockers to track FTBFS in packages needing
>> binNMUing - so far I have just added those. I think it probably makes
>> sense to keep with that, as the above link give you the full picture
>> when needed.

We need to distinguish among blockers and non-blockers in that list. E.g.,
"fails to run with perl 5.26" is a blocker, but "uses a deprecated feature" is
not. So don't add all the bugs as blockers, but adding some in that list (the
ones that will be RC when the transition starts) would make sense.

> Fine by me of course. Should we also mark possible unrelated sid FTBFS
> bugs of those packages as blockers? ISTR us doing that in the past.

Yes please.

Cheers,
Emilio

Message #38 received at 866389@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: gregor herrmann <gregoa@debian.org>

To: Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <pochu@debian.org>, 866389@bugs.debian.org

Cc: Niko Tyni <ntyni@debian.org>, Dominic Hargreaves <dom@earth.li>

Subject: Re: Bug#866389: transition: perl 5.26

Date: Sun, 2 Jul 2017 17:01:20 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On Fri, 30 Jun 2017 12:39:09 +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:

> We need to distinguish among blockers and non-blockers in that list. E.g.,
> "fails to run with perl 5.26" is a blocker, but "uses a deprecated feature" is
> not. 

Just for clarification, most of the bugs which have "deprecated" in
the title will fail to run with 5.26; IOW: the warnings are from
5.24, and in 5.26 the issues become fatal.


Cheers,
gregor

-- 
 .''`.  https://info.comodo.priv.at/ - Debian Developer https://www.debian.org
 : :' : OpenPGP fingerprint D1E1 316E 93A7 60A8 104D  85FA BB3A 6801 8649 AA06
 `. `'  Member of VIBE!AT & SPI, fellow of the Free Software Foundation Europe
   `-   NP: Solomon Burke: Flesh And Blood

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #43 received at 866389@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Dominic Hargreaves <dom@earth.li>

To: gregor herrmann <gregoa@debian.org>

Cc: Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <pochu@debian.org>, 866389@bugs.debian.org, Niko Tyni <ntyni@debian.org>

Subject: Re: Bug#866389: transition: perl 5.26

Date: Sun, 2 Jul 2017 18:04:22 +0100

On Sun, Jul 02, 2017 at 05:01:20PM +0200, gregor herrmann wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Jun 2017 12:39:09 +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> 
> > We need to distinguish among blockers and non-blockers in that list. E.g.,
> > "fails to run with perl 5.26" is a blocker, but "uses a deprecated feature" is
> > not. 
> 
> Just for clarification, most of the bugs which have "deprecated" in
> the title will fail to run with 5.26; IOW: the warnings are from
> 5.24, and in 5.26 the issues become fatal.

I've retitled those bugs would could be confusing in this regard. I
believe that all the bugs which severity: important are the ones which
would become RC when we decide we want to start soon.

Noting for completeness that Niko has added the other lockers on
architecture: all related FTBFS bugs as requested by Emilio.

Cheers,
Dominic.

Message #66 received at 866389@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <pochu@debian.org>

To: Dominic Hargreaves <dom@earth.li>, gregor herrmann <gregoa@debian.org>

Cc: 866389@bugs.debian.org, Niko Tyni <ntyni@debian.org>

Subject: Re: Bug#866389: transition: perl 5.26

Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2017 10:50:16 +0200

On 02/07/17 19:04, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 02, 2017 at 05:01:20PM +0200, gregor herrmann wrote:
>> On Fri, 30 Jun 2017 12:39:09 +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
>>
>>> We need to distinguish among blockers and non-blockers in that list. E.g.,
>>> "fails to run with perl 5.26" is a blocker, but "uses a deprecated feature" is
>>> not. 
>>
>> Just for clarification, most of the bugs which have "deprecated" in
>> the title will fail to run with 5.26; IOW: the warnings are from
>> 5.24, and in 5.26 the issues become fatal.
> 
> I've retitled those bugs would could be confusing in this regard. I
> believe that all the bugs which severity: important are the ones which
> would become RC when we decide we want to start soon.
> 
> Noting for completeness that Niko has added the other lockers on
> architecture: all related FTBFS bugs as requested by Emilio.

Thanks. Please go ahead and bump them to severity:serious as we are close to
doing this.

Cheers,
Emilio

Message #71 received at 866389@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Niko Tyni <ntyni@debian.org>

To: Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <pochu@debian.org>

Cc: Dominic Hargreaves <dom@earth.li>, gregor herrmann <gregoa@debian.org>, 866389@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#866389: transition: perl 5.26

Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2017 22:52:49 +0300

On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 10:50:16AM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> On 02/07/17 19:04, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
> > On Sun, Jul 02, 2017 at 05:01:20PM +0200, gregor herrmann wrote:
> >> On Fri, 30 Jun 2017 12:39:09 +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> >>
> >>> We need to distinguish among blockers and non-blockers in that list. E.g.,
> >>> "fails to run with perl 5.26" is a blocker, but "uses a deprecated feature" is
> >>> not. 
> >>
> >> Just for clarification, most of the bugs which have "deprecated" in
> >> the title will fail to run with 5.26; IOW: the warnings are from
> >> 5.24, and in 5.26 the issues become fatal.
> > 
> > I've retitled those bugs would could be confusing in this regard. I
> > believe that all the bugs which severity: important are the ones which
> > would become RC when we decide we want to start soon.
> > 
> > Noting for completeness that Niko has added the other lockers on
> > architecture: all related FTBFS bugs as requested by Emilio.
> 
> Thanks. Please go ahead and bump them to severity:serious as we are close to
> doing this.

Thanks, done.
-- 
Niko

Message #84 received at 866389@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: gregor herrmann <gregoa@debian.org>

To: Niko Tyni <ntyni@debian.org>, 866389@bugs.debian.org

Cc: Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <pochu@debian.org>, Dominic Hargreaves <dom@earth.li>

Subject: Re: Bug#866389: transition: perl 5.26

Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2017 21:04:23 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On Fri, 14 Jul 2017 22:52:49 +0300, Niko Tyni wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 10:50:16AM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> > 
> > Thanks. Please go ahead and bump them to severity:serious as we are close to
> > doing this.
> 
> Thanks, done.

Update re blocking bugs: In a couple of hours the last 4 NMUs will
leave DELAYED. The remaining buggy packages, already targetted for
auto-removal, then are:

#826473: kdesrc-build: no rdepends, can be removed from testing (or
         maybe even from the archive, according to the bug log).

#867213: syslog-ng-incubator: one rdep (syslog-ng). No reaction on
         the bug report, unrelated build failure; I guess syslog-ng*
         can be removed from testing if noone fixes the problem in
         time.

So I think from the point of view of blockers we are basically ready.


Cheers,
gregor

-- 
 .''`.  https://info.comodo.priv.at/ - Debian Developer https://www.debian.org
 : :' : OpenPGP fingerprint D1E1 316E 93A7 60A8 104D  85FA BB3A 6801 8649 AA06
 `. `'  Member of VIBE!AT & SPI, fellow of the Free Software Foundation Europe
   `-   

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #89 received at 866389@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org>

To: gregor herrmann <gregoa@debian.org>, 866389@bugs.debian.org

Cc: Niko Tyni <ntyni@debian.org>, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <pochu@debian.org>, Dominic Hargreaves <dom@earth.li>

Subject: Re: Bug#866389: transition: perl 5.26

Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2017 10:43:30 +1000

On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 5:04 AM, gregor herrmann wrote:

> #867213: syslog-ng-incubator: one rdep (syslog-ng). No reaction on
>          the bug report, unrelated build failure; I guess syslog-ng*
>          can be removed from testing if noone fixes the problem in
>          time.

I'd like to point out that DSA relies on syslog-ng on debian.org
hosts, so it would be appreciated if the issues could be fixed or
worked around rather than removing syslog-ng from buster. Of course
buster is not in use on any debian.org hosts yet.

-- 
bye,
pabs

https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise

Message #94 received at 866389@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: gregor herrmann <gregoa@debian.org>

To: Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org>

Cc: 866389@bugs.debian.org, Niko Tyni <ntyni@debian.org>, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <pochu@debian.org>, Dominic Hargreaves <dom@earth.li>

Subject: Re: Bug#866389: transition: perl 5.26

Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2017 10:51:53 +0200

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 10:43:30 +1000, Paul Wise wrote:

> On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 5:04 AM, gregor herrmann wrote:
> > #867213: syslog-ng-incubator: one rdep (syslog-ng). No reaction on
> >          the bug report, unrelated build failure; I guess syslog-ng*
> >          can be removed from testing if noone fixes the problem in
> >          time.
> I'd like to point out that DSA relies on syslog-ng on debian.org
> hosts, so it would be appreciated if the issues could be fixed or
> worked around rather than removing syslog-ng from buster. Of course
> buster is not in use on any debian.org hosts yet.

Good news: Some hours ago the maintainer added a note about a local
fix to the bug log and tagged the bug pending.


Cheers,
gregor 

-- 
 .''`.  https://info.comodo.priv.at/ - Debian Developer https://www.debian.org
 : :' : OpenPGP fingerprint D1E1 316E 93A7 60A8 104D  85FA BB3A 6801 8649 AA06
 `. `'  Member of VIBE!AT & SPI, fellow of the Free Software Foundation Europe
   `-   BOFH excuse #286:  Telecommunications is downgrading. 

Message #99 received at 866389@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Niko Tyni <ntyni@debian.org>

To: gregor herrmann <gregoa@debian.org>

Cc: Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org>, 866389@bugs.debian.org, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <pochu@debian.org>, Dominic Hargreaves <dom@earth.li>

Subject: Re: Bug#866389: transition: perl 5.26

Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2017 21:31:02 +0300

On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 10:51:53AM +0200, gregor herrmann wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 10:43:30 +1000, Paul Wise wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 5:04 AM, gregor herrmann wrote:
> > > #867213: syslog-ng-incubator: one rdep (syslog-ng). No reaction on
> > >          the bug report, unrelated build failure; I guess syslog-ng*
> > >          can be removed from testing if noone fixes the problem in
> > >          time.
> > I'd like to point out that DSA relies on syslog-ng on debian.org
> > hosts, so it would be appreciated if the issues could be fixed or
> > worked around rather than removing syslog-ng from buster. Of course
> > buster is not in use on any debian.org hosts yet.
> 
> Good news: Some hours ago the maintainer added a note about a local
> fix to the bug log and tagged the bug pending.

Indeed. I'd also like to point out that the package failing to build in
sid is src:syslog-ng-incubator, not syslog-ng itself. The binary packages
that risk testing removal due to this are

 syslog-ng-mod-trigger
 syslog-ng-mod-rss
 syslog-ng-mod-basicfuncs-plus
 syslog-ng-mod-lua
 syslog-ng-mod-perl
 syslog-ng-mod-date
 syslog-ng-mod-grok
 syslog-ng-mod-kafka
 syslog-ng-mod-zmq

-- 
Niko Tyni   ntyni@debian.org

Message #104 received at 866389@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Niko Tyni <ntyni@debian.org>

To: Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <pochu@debian.org>

Cc: 866389@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#866389: transition: perl 5.26

Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2017 22:01:14 +0300

On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 07:51:33PM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> Control: forwarded -1 https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/perl5.26.html
> 
> On 29/06/17 14:07, Niko Tyni wrote:
> > Package: release.debian.org
> > User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
> > Usertags: transition
> > X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-perl@lists.debian.org
> > 
> > We'd like to get Perl 5.26 in sid/buster soonish.

> Nice. Let us know when things are better. Currently there's not much going on
> and we could do the perl transition without problems if you were ready. But
> let's evaluate again when things are improved.

Hi, we're now ready to go. The only known blocker left is #826473 in
kdesrc-build, which can be removed from testing. We just did a one last
rebuild test of the packages that will need a binnmu, and found no new
issues.

Many kudos to all the maintainers who fixed their packages, and to Gregor
who fixed the rest :)

Please let us know when it would be OK to upload Perl 5.26 to sid.
-- 
Niko Tyni   ntyni@debian.org

Message #109 received at 866389@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <pochu@debian.org>

To: Niko Tyni <ntyni@debian.org>

Cc: 866389@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#866389: transition: perl 5.26

Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2017 21:16:41 +0200

Control: tags -1 confirmed

On 20/07/17 21:01, Niko Tyni wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 07:51:33PM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
>> Control: forwarded -1 https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/perl5.26.html
>>
>> On 29/06/17 14:07, Niko Tyni wrote:
>>> Package: release.debian.org
>>> User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
>>> Usertags: transition
>>> X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-perl@lists.debian.org
>>>
>>> We'd like to get Perl 5.26 in sid/buster soonish.
> 
>> Nice. Let us know when things are better. Currently there's not much going on
>> and we could do the perl transition without problems if you were ready. But
>> let's evaluate again when things are improved.
> 
> Hi, we're now ready to go. The only known blocker left is #826473 in
> kdesrc-build, which can be removed from testing. We just did a one last
> rebuild test of the packages that will need a binnmu, and found no new
> issues.
> 
> Many kudos to all the maintainers who fixed their packages, and to Gregor
> who fixed the rest :)
> 
> Please let us know when it would be OK to upload Perl 5.26 to sid.

Awesome. Now is a good time. I have added some hints for the gsoap and
libprelude transitions, so they don't get entangled with this one.

go go go!
Emilio

Message #116 received at 866389@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Niko Tyni <ntyni@debian.org>

To: Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <pochu@debian.org>

Cc: 866389@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#866389: transition: perl 5.26

Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2017 23:51:03 +0300

Control: block -1 with 869139

On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 09:16:41PM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> On 20/07/17 21:01, Niko Tyni wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 07:51:33PM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> >> Control: forwarded -1 https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/perl5.26.html

> > Please let us know when it would be OK to upload Perl 5.26 to sid.
> 
> Awesome. Now is a good time. I have added some hints for the gsoap and
> libprelude transitions, so they don't get entangled with this one.

Thanks. I have an upload (almost) ready, but a last minute issue popped
up as the fixed syslog-ng-incubator fails to build on s390x. See #869139.

Do you want me to hold off because of that?
-- 
Niko Tyni   ntyni@debian.org

Message #123 received at 866389@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <pochu@debian.org>

To: Niko Tyni <ntyni@debian.org>

Cc: 866389@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#866389: transition: perl 5.26

Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2017 10:19:11 +0200

On 20/07/17 22:51, Niko Tyni wrote:
> Control: block -1 with 869139
> 
> On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 09:16:41PM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
>> On 20/07/17 21:01, Niko Tyni wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 07:51:33PM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
>>>> Control: forwarded -1 https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/perl5.26.html
> 
>>> Please let us know when it would be OK to upload Perl 5.26 to sid.
>>
>> Awesome. Now is a good time. I have added some hints for the gsoap and
>> libprelude transitions, so they don't get entangled with this one.
> 
> Thanks. I have an upload (almost) ready, but a last minute issue popped
> up as the fixed syslog-ng-incubator fails to build on s390x. See #869139.
> 
> Do you want me to hold off because of that?

I think we can go ahead and worst case remove it as we were planning to before
it got fixed.

Cheers,
Emilio

Message #128 received at 866389@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Niko Tyni <ntyni@debian.org>

To: Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <pochu@debian.org>

Cc: 866389@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#866389: transition: perl 5.26

Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2017 23:53:03 +0300

On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 10:19:11AM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> On 20/07/17 22:51, Niko Tyni wrote:
> > Control: block -1 with 869139
> > 
> > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 09:16:41PM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> >> On 20/07/17 21:01, Niko Tyni wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 07:51:33PM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> >>>> Control: forwarded -1 https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/perl5.26.html
> > 
> >>> Please let us know when it would be OK to upload Perl 5.26 to sid.
> >>
> >> Awesome. Now is a good time. I have added some hints for the gsoap and
> >> libprelude transitions, so they don't get entangled with this one.
> > 
> > Thanks. I have an upload (almost) ready, but a last minute issue popped
> > up as the fixed syslog-ng-incubator fails to build on s390x. See #869139.
> > 
> > Do you want me to hold off because of that?
> 
> I think we can go ahead and worst case remove it as we were planning to before
> it got fixed.

Thanks. Uploaded earlier today, noting here for the sake of completeness.
-- 
Niko

Message #133 received at 866389@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <pochu@debian.org>

To: Niko Tyni <ntyni@debian.org>

Cc: 866389@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#866389: transition: perl 5.26

Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2017 10:07:43 +0200

On 21/07/17 22:53, Niko Tyni wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 10:19:11AM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
>> On 20/07/17 22:51, Niko Tyni wrote:
>>> Control: block -1 with 869139
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 09:16:41PM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
>>>> On 20/07/17 21:01, Niko Tyni wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 07:51:33PM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
>>>>>> Control: forwarded -1 https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/perl5.26.html
>>>
>>>>> Please let us know when it would be OK to upload Perl 5.26 to sid.
>>>>
>>>> Awesome. Now is a good time. I have added some hints for the gsoap and
>>>> libprelude transitions, so they don't get entangled with this one.
>>>
>>> Thanks. I have an upload (almost) ready, but a last minute issue popped
>>> up as the fixed syslog-ng-incubator fails to build on s390x. See #869139.
>>>
>>> Do you want me to hold off because of that?
>>
>> I think we can go ahead and worst case remove it as we were planning to before
>> it got fixed.
> 
> Thanks. Uploaded earlier today, noting here for the sake of completeness.

And binNMUs are scheduled for levels 1 and 2 since yesterday (not without
problems as I forgot that we need --extra-depends here, given perl-base is
installed on the chroots). Things were building fine now, I'll schedule the rest
of the binNMUs if things are looking fine.

Cheers,
Emilio

Message #138 received at 866389@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <pochu@debian.org>

To: Niko Tyni <ntyni@debian.org>

Cc: 866389@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#866389: transition: perl 5.26

Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2017 10:22:18 +0200

On 22/07/17 10:07, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> On 21/07/17 22:53, Niko Tyni wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 10:19:11AM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
>>> On 20/07/17 22:51, Niko Tyni wrote:
>>>> Control: block -1 with 869139
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 09:16:41PM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
>>>>> On 20/07/17 21:01, Niko Tyni wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 07:51:33PM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
>>>>>>> Control: forwarded -1 https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/perl5.26.html
>>>>
>>>>>> Please let us know when it would be OK to upload Perl 5.26 to sid.
>>>>>
>>>>> Awesome. Now is a good time. I have added some hints for the gsoap and
>>>>> libprelude transitions, so they don't get entangled with this one.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks. I have an upload (almost) ready, but a last minute issue popped
>>>> up as the fixed syslog-ng-incubator fails to build on s390x. See #869139.
>>>>
>>>> Do you want me to hold off because of that?
>>>
>>> I think we can go ahead and worst case remove it as we were planning to before
>>> it got fixed.
>>
>> Thanks. Uploaded earlier today, noting here for the sake of completeness.
> 
> And binNMUs are scheduled for levels 1 and 2 since yesterday (not without
> problems as I forgot that we need --extra-depends here, given perl-base is
> installed on the chroots). Things were building fine now, I'll schedule the rest
> of the binNMUs if things are looking fine.

binNMUs scheduled for all the rest as well, as things are looking good and the
fast architectures are finished or almost finished.

Cheers,
Emilio

Message #165 received at 866389-done@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <pochu@debian.org>

To: Niko Tyni <ntyni@debian.org>

Cc: 866389-done@bugs.debian.org, debian-perl@lists.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#866389: transition: perl 5.26

Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2017 08:50:43 +0200

On 22/07/17 10:22, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> On 22/07/17 10:07, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
>> On 21/07/17 22:53, Niko Tyni wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 10:19:11AM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
>>>> On 20/07/17 22:51, Niko Tyni wrote:
>>>>> Control: block -1 with 869139
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 09:16:41PM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
>>>>>> On 20/07/17 21:01, Niko Tyni wrote:
>>>>>>> On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 07:51:33PM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
>>>>>>>> Control: forwarded -1 https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/perl5.26.html
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please let us know when it would be OK to upload Perl 5.26 to sid.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Awesome. Now is a good time. I have added some hints for the gsoap and
>>>>>> libprelude transitions, so they don't get entangled with this one.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks. I have an upload (almost) ready, but a last minute issue popped
>>>>> up as the fixed syslog-ng-incubator fails to build on s390x. See #869139.
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you want me to hold off because of that?
>>>>
>>>> I think we can go ahead and worst case remove it as we were planning to before
>>>> it got fixed.
>>>
>>> Thanks. Uploaded earlier today, noting here for the sake of completeness.
>>
>> And binNMUs are scheduled for levels 1 and 2 since yesterday (not without
>> problems as I forgot that we need --extra-depends here, given perl-base is
>> installed on the chroots). Things were building fine now, I'll schedule the rest
>> of the binNMUs if things are looking fine.
> 
> binNMUs scheduled for all the rest as well, as things are looking good and the
> fast architectures are finished or almost finished.

Took a bit for armhf to catch up with the binNMUs, but after it did, things were
almost ready. With a handful of removals, perl is in testing now! Thanks to Ivo
for debugging and working around a britney crash.

Cheers,
Emilio

Send a report that this bug log contains spam.