On 30/09/15 19:18, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > On 19/09/15 15:27, Antonio Terceiro wrote: >> On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 07:17:38PM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: >>> On 28/07/15 23:23, Antonio Terceiro wrote: >>>> Hello release team. >>>> >>>> We are not at a point where it makes sense to switch the default ruby >>>> in unstable. I have been running it on my work machine for a few weeks >>>> and didn't notice any problems worth postponing this any longer. >>>> >>>> After that is done, the following packages will need to be binNMUed: >>>> >>>> hyperestraier >>>> libguestfs >>>> mapserver >>>> marisa >>>> ngraph-gtk >>>> notmuch >>>> obexftp >>>> player >>>> qdbm >>>> qtruby >>>> raspell >>>> redland-bindings >>>> remctl >>>> root-system >>>> rrdtool >>>> rubyluabridge >>>> stfl >>>> vim >>>> xmms2 >>>> >>>> These packages FTBFS and we will need to look at them individually: >>>> >>>> korundum >>>> kross-interpreters >>>> subversion >>>> treil >>>> uwsgi >>>> zeroc-ice >>>> weechat >>>> >>>> the remaining packages are ruby libraries who are either not ported or >>>> have build problems, and it is OK to have them removed from testing for >>>> now. >>>> >>>> Please let me know if it's OK to go forward with this, i.e. uploading >>>> ruby-defaults to unstable so that ruby2.2 becomes the default ruby. >>> >>> Might be best to wait until after the libstdc++ transition. >>> >>> Emilio >> >> Would it be OK for us to go ahead with this now that the worst part of >> of libstdc++ is done? > > Can you give an update on how many packages would FTBFS ? Are there bugs, > patches, or anything for those?
Ping? It'd be good to get this finished eventually. Emilio
