Re: Binary uploads into the archive

2024-10-28 Thread Andrey Rakhmatullin
On Mon, Oct 28, 2024 at 10:09:16PM +0100, Daniel Leidert wrote: > by accident, I uploaded a binary package today (ruby-rouge) instead of > its source-package into the archive. I expected the binary package > being rejected once I discovered my mistake. But it was accepted > instead, and it was also

s390x architecture status?

2024-10-28 Thread Berli Gayathri
Hi everyone, I am employed with IBM as a Debian maintainer for the S390x. I would like to assume responsibility for this bundle. I previously replied to the bug below about updating it due to OpenSSL errors. https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1080317 Many changes and bugs have b

Rebuilds to enable PAC and BTI support on arm64

2024-10-28 Thread Sebastian Ramacher
Hi, since dpkg 1.22.0 the additional hardening flags to enable Pointer Authentication (PAC) and Branch Target Identification (BTI) on arm64 are enabled by default. See [1] for the discussion to enable these flags. To have the desired effect for the next release and have some time to catch regress

Binary uploads into the archive

2024-10-28 Thread Daniel Leidert
Hi, by accident, I uploaded a binary package today (ruby-rouge) instead of its source-package into the archive. I expected the binary package being rejected once I discovered my mistake. But it was accepted instead, and it was also not being rebuilt. Didn't we turn off binary package uploads? Shou

Re: s390x architecture status?

2024-10-28 Thread Elizabeth K. Joseph
On Mon, Oct 28, 2024 at 5:49 AM Marco d'Itri wrote: > > On Oct 28, Chris Hofstaedtler wrote: > > > It also appears true that IBM has an interest in s390x, but today > I wonder if their interest could actually be just in Debian providing > a base for the Ubuntu port (which I understand used to be

Re: s390x architecture status?

2024-10-28 Thread Marco d'Itri
On Oct 28, Chris Hofstaedtler wrote: > It also appears true that IBM has an interest in s390x, but today I wonder if their interest could actually be just in Debian providing a base for the Ubuntu port (which I understand used to be funded by IBM). And if this is still true now that IBM owns Re

Re: s390x architecture status?

2024-10-28 Thread Simon McVittie
On Mon, 28 Oct 2024 at 10:24:04 +0100, Chris Hofstaedtler wrote: > b) various packages already ignore s390x (gnome? others?) GNOME is currently buildable on s390x, but we have to ignore a lot of test failures related to incorrect endianness of colour channels in image data (for example in GTK 3, G

s390x architecture status?

2024-10-28 Thread Chris Hofstaedtler
Hello! I want to draw attention to, from my point of view, open questions/problems with the s390x architecture. In short, it seems to me, that: a) there are no porters left (to fix serious problems) b) various packages already ignore s390x (gnome? others?) c) general, including upstreams, interes