OpenLDAP 2.6 transition

[Steve Langasek]

On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 07:15:21PM -0500, Sergio Durigan Junior wrote:
> On Monday, November 21 2022, I wrote:

> > On Monday, November 21 2022, Steve Langasek wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 06:32:39PM -0500, Sergio Durigan Junior wrote:
> >>> Hello,
> >>
> >>> This is a heads up that the OpenLDAP 2.6 transition has started.  I have
> >>> just uploaded the package to lunar-proposed and will be performing
> >>> no-change uploads to its reverse dependencies soon.
> >>
> >>> The list of packages that are going to be affected by this transition
> >>> can be obtained by running:
> >>
> >>>   $ reverse-depends -r lunar src:openldap
> >>
> >>> I did a mass-rebuild of said packages in a bileto PPA and everything
> >>> looks good (aside from some unrelated FTBFSes).
> >>
> >> I would ask you to hold off right now on doing no-change rebuilds of any
> >> packages currently in -proposed.  There are in-progress language transitions
> >> for perl, python, and R, and rebuilding all the openldap language bindings
> >> right now will entangle all of those transitions and likely make it harder
> >> to get them migrated.
> >
> > Ah, no problem.  It can wait.
> >
> >> Hopefully, the autopkgtest backlogs on arm64 and s390x will clear this week
> >> and then we'll have a better view on what it takes to finish the above
> >> in-progress transitions, and then rebuild anything still linking against
> >> libldap-2.5-0.
> >
> > +1.  Thanks, and enjoy your PTO.

> Perl and Python have migrated, so I will go ahead with the no-change
> uploads tomorrow.

FWIW seeing that these hadn't been done yet and openldap had migrated (so
all of the reverse-dependencies were on the NBS report), I went ahead and
did uploads today of a filtered list of reverse-dependencies, excluding any
of those that are currently in -proposed.

Uploading those other packages won't cause entanglements between any
remaining transitions, but it may slow down the migration of some of them,
so I didn't upload them - but if you want to upload them now, there's no
fundamental reason you can't.

Remaining packages would be:

Package gvm-libs already present in lunar-proposed (but not fixed)
 (Package gvm-libs not built in lunar-proposed)
Package lua-apr already present in lunar-proposed (but not fixed)
 (Package lua-apr not built in lunar-proposed)
Package openscap already present in lunar-proposed (but not fixed)
Rebuilding openscap
Rebuilding postgresql-14
Package sssd already present in lunar-proposed (but not fixed)
 (Package sssd not built in lunar-proposed)
Package uwsgi already present in lunar-proposed (but not fixed)
 (Package uwsgi not built in lunar-proposed)
Package virtuoso-opensource already present in lunar-proposed (but not fixed)
 (Package virtuoso-opensource not built in lunar-proposed)
Package wine already present in lunar-proposed (but not fixed)
 (Package wine not built in lunar-proposed)
Package wine-development already present in lunar-proposed (but not fixed)
 (Package wine-development not built in lunar-proposed)

This also gives you the list of reverse-dependencies that FTBFS.

Cheers,
-- 
Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer                                   https://www.debian.org/
slangasek at ubuntu.com                                     vorlon at debian.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/attachments/20221215/663aeb83/attachment.sig>