On Sat, Nov 3, 2018 at 6:47 PM Adam Borowski <kilob...@angband.pl> wrote: > Perhaps we should quickly upload a revert, using the last good version of > librsvg, before things degrade? Effectively removing librsvg on 11 archs > (not counting non-official ones) stops any GUI there. Including proverbial > fvwm.
It sounds to me like you're saying that to fix librsvg being out of date on 11 arches, we need to make it out of date on every architecture. What is the actual consequence of the latest librsvg being unbuildable on those arches? The old binaries won't automatically be removed there, right? As I mentioned in #debian-devel, librsvg is a security-sensitive library. The Debian GNOME team has long wanted a supported version of librsvg to be buildable on all release architectures in time for the Buster release to ease the maintainability burden on the Security team (as well as benefiting from some hardening improvements). I didn't and don't mean to upset you. It honestly didn't occur to me that I ought to talk to ports maintainers before uploading packages that won't build on ports. Instead of putting all the blame on the GNOME team, maybe you could have expressed your concerns during the months that librsvg was still in experimental? Or maybe you could have said "Rust is now available on all release architectures, but please talk to us before uploading a rustified library." While today's upload was apparently a surprise, I don't think it should have been a surprise that this upload was coming. Reference -------------- https://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2017-December/msg00072.html Thanks, Jeremy Bicha
