On Wed, Apr 17, 2024 at 01:47:49PM -0400, Maxim Cournoyer wrote: > Hello, > > Ludovic Courtès writes: > > > Hi Steve, > > > > Steve George skribis: > > > >> On 10 Apr, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > > > > [...] > > > >>> To be clear (but I guess it’s crystal clear to anyone who’s been around > >>> long enough :-)), what we need most is someone to keep track of changes, > >>> coordinate efforts, decide what goes in the branch and what’s postponed > >>> or moved to a separate branch, and send periodic (weekly) status updates > >>> over the course of a couple of months. This can (and probably should) > >>> be done without doing any actual hacking on the branch. > >> (...) > >> > >> This sounds like something I can do: > >> > >> - track changes (in branch) > >> - co-ordinate blocking issues (in bug system) > >> - co-ordinate with people doing the actual work :-P > >> - send (periodic) weekly emails > >> - encourage shipping by minimising scope creep ;-) > > > > Awesome, thanks for volunteering! > > > >> Sounds like there's already agreement to revert the 'pkgconf' change > >> and push a new branch without them which becomes > >> 'core-updates'. Josselin on IRC I had the impression you were > >> working on that? > > > > I’m not sure what the situation is (I see Maxim just pushed changes on > > top of current ‘core-updates’, so maybe it’s OK?). > > Since branches were merged in, I believe the problem we are facing at > the moment is librsvg failing its test suite with a segfault (!). Could > be the glibc upgrade, or rust itself, I'm not sure. I was trying to > upgrade librsvg, which needs an update anyway, but it pulls many rust > crates updates. I'll get there eventually, if nobody beats me to it. I personally think getting librsvg updated will be easier on the rust-team branch than on the core-updates branch, since there have been many commits to the rust-team branch that haven't yet been merged into master. Assuming that now that the cairo upgrade to 1.18 was what was holding back the librsvg upgrade, I can get librsvg up to a newer version and then submit it for a merge. Overall the branch should be in fairly good shape. > > Josselin, Maxim: could you explain what problems there are around > > pkgconf and what you would recommend? > > Nothing in particular to point at the moment, but remaining problems > would manifest in the form of missing inputs, due to transitive libtool > dependencies causing overlinking and the new pkgconf being smart enough > to optimize away some previously captured link directives that would be > baked in the RUNPATH and sastify libtool overlinking needs. > > The solution is to hunt the libtool .la files from the transitive > dependencies causing the problem and removing them. See commit > b6540bd285cbe5920ad379ddfc6256359ee7204c for an example. > > -- > Thanks, > Maxim > -- Efraim Flashner רנשלפ םירפא GPG key = A28B F40C 3E55 1372 662D 14F7 41AA E7DC CA3D 8351 Confidentiality cannot be guaranteed on emails sent or received unencrypted