Re: Backport request: liburcu and libblkid

Cyril Brulebois <[email protected]> Wed, 29 Jan 2025 22:42:21 +0100

Newsgroups	gmane.linux.debian.backports.general
Organization	Debian
Message-ID	<[email protected]>

Hi,

Krzysztof Hajdamowicz <[email protected]> (2025-01-29):
> Hello Debian Backports Team,
> 
> I would like to request the backporting of liburcu and libblkid to Debian
> Bookworm.
> 
>    - liburcu is available as liburcu8t64 in Trixie and Sid (version 0.14.1).
>    https://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=liburcu8t64
>    - libblkid version 2.40.4-1 exists in Trixie, and 2.40.4-2 in Sid.
>    https://packages.debian.org/trixie/libblkid-dev

It'd be a good idea to have the relevant maintainers involved in that
discussion. Quoting in full for their benefit.

> I have successfully rebuilt the source package for liburcu8t64 in a
> Bookworm environment after downgrading the dpkg-dev build-requirement.
> However, during installation, dpkg reported that liburcu8t64 (new) breaks
> liburcu8, which is a dependency for several packages (e.g., xfsprogs,
> glusterfs).
> After installing it with --force, xfsprogs continued to function without
> issues.
> I don't know why liburcu8 change package name to liburcu8t64, maybe using
> old name is safe for Bookworm.

That's the 64-bit time_t transition, which is irrelevant for stable and
I'd think stable-backports, so the relevant changes should probably be
reverted.

> Both of these packages are necessary for compiling bcachefs-tools in
> its recent versions.
> 
> Would it be possible to have them backported to Bookworm?
> Thank you for your time and consideration!


Cheers,
-- 
Cyril Brulebois ([email protected])            <https://debamax.com/>
D-I release manager -- Release team member -- Freelance Consultant

signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 833 B)