Re: Bug#1036884: transition: time64_t - openjdk-17 needs re-bootstrap on armel,armhf

On 2024-03-27 22:30 +0000, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> >OK, got those. but that's just binaries. It was the source changes I
> >was looking for (or did I misunderstand and you didn't actually make
> >any of those?),
> 
> Yes, I did not make any source changes. These were the last binaries
> from before the t64 transition (I downloaded the .deb files unchanged)
> with just control.tar.xz/control changed to allow installation given
> the relevant libraries were already rebuilt for t64.

OK. I get it now.

> > but actually having an openjdk binaries is very useful
> >too to satisfy the self-dependency without more faff.
> 
> Yes, that was their purpose.

And it worked beatifully. Thanks.

armhf and armel uploaded and accepted half an hour ago (armel built by Andrey Rakhmatullin)

I'll try doing openjdk-20 next.


Wookey
-- 
Principal hats:  Debian, Wookware, ARM
http://wookware.org/

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=TtDB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----