Em 5 de janeiro de 2025 15:28:24 GMT-05:00, Santiago Vila <sanv...@debian.org>
escreveu:
>El 5/1/25 a las 21:07, Otto Kekäläinen escribió:
>>> This is an update for my previous MBF announcement here:
>>>
>>> https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2024/05/msg00414.html
>>>
>>> I did another test rebuild and found 11 new packages failing
>>> in the not-so-distant future. I also found another package
>>> for which the fix was lost and the bug had to reopened.
>>
>> Did you use libfaketime in this round of rebuilds?
>> (https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2024/05/msg00422.html)? Do you
>> think it works well, should we add an extra job in Salsa CI that does
>> the build or runs autopkgtests under 'faketime 2028-06-30'? Or even
>> 'faketime 2038-06-30' to cover 32-bit issues too?
>
>Yes, it would be *really* nice to have an extra job in Salsa CI for that!
>
>No, I did not use libfaketime yet (sorry). If you want to make a job
>in Salsa you can just test with any of the affected packages above and
>the (failed) build log should be very similar to the one I provided
>in each of the bugs.
>
JFTR, faketime causes issues in the reprotest job:
https://salsa.debian.org/salsa-ci-team/pipeline/#faketime-is-currently-disabled
>I would be more than happy if we could release trixie
>without time-bombs, but of course if we can also test
>for 2038-06-30, the better.
>
>Maybe a common job which may be fine-tuned using a variable
>for the cut date would allow to do that easily.
>
>Thanks.
>
