On Tue, 2021-11-23 at 15:20 -0500, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote: > In preparing the rustc 1.51 upload/backport (to support backports of > the > latest firefox-esr and thunderbird packages) it has been suggested > that > to avoid some issues associated with providing a significant new > version > of rustc in the rustc binary package (along with the associated > library > packages), that I prepare the 1.51 rustc package with a different > name. > Following the model of what was done for gcc, nasm, and nodejs, I was > considering source package rustc-mozilla with a single binary package > (also rustc-mozilla) to ensure that rdeps don't end up getting > surprised > by a new rustc. Would this be considered acceptable for the bullseye > and buster uploads of rustc 1.51? >
I think that sounds sensible, given that bullseye currently has 1.48 (and buster 1.41). As a matter of interest, why was 1.51 the version chosen? I'm mostly curious as that version is not currently in any suite in Debian. Regards, Adam
