[Pkg-javascript-devel] nodejs-12 transition

[Xavier]

Le 25/05/2020 à 10:51, Jérémy Lal a écrit :
> 
> 
> Le lun. 25 mai 2020 à 09:22, Nilesh Patra <npatra974 at gmail.com
> <mailto:npatra974 at gmail.com>> a écrit :
> 
>     Hi Jérémy
> 
>     On Sat, 7 Mar 2020, 14:34 Jérémy Lal, <kapouer at melix.org
>     <mailto:kapouer at melix.org>> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>         Le sam. 7 mars 2020 à 06:18, Nilesh Patra <npatra974 at gmail.com
>         <mailto:npatra974 at gmail.com>> a écrit :
> 
> 
> 
>                 I think we should start Node.js 12 migration (with
>                 rollup, webpack,
>                 gulp,...), this will also fix some RC/FTBFS bugs, should we?
>                 I fixed a lot of failing autopkgtest errors (using [1]
>                 list), most of
>                 the remaining packages in this list will be fixed by
>                 node-iconv rebuild.
> 
> 
>             Agreed. Node-nodedbi is removed from testing, officially
>             now. We can file a (RC) bug against Node-srs for it to _not_
>             migrate, same for Node-millstone.
>             Nodejs transition is also required for acorn transition,
>             from what I read on the mailing list.
> 
>             As it's been pending now, for a long time and there's not
>             much to be done except fixing these last 2-3 blockers, which
>             will be removed (from testing) anyway.
>             Would it be a good time to start the transition?
>             If yes, It would be great to start in other transitions, :)
> 
> 
> 
>         Right now node is waiting upon icu >=  64, which won't be in sid
>         before ~may.
> 
> 
>     This is probably the time now - may ends with the coming weekend.
>     Any updates if this is in sid or when this would get to sid if it
>     isn't already?
> 
> 
> It's ready to be built, but not ready to go in testing:
> https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=nodejs&suite=experimental
> 
> - amd64 some tests won't pass because of network issues
>   I never figured why some build servers fail on this, and some not.
> *  If anyone knows an explanation, that'll help.*
> - armhf, i386: dh_dwz fails because it exhausts memory.
>   Somewhat fixed by ignoring those failures. *Is there a better option ?*
> - mips64el: tools/test.py no longer recognize the arch (it should get it
> from
>   the one mapped in debian/rules). Easy to fix.
> - mipsel: fails to build, OOM as some point.
>   That was on a 8GB memory machine, so i suppose it's bad luck, something
>   else was using memory maybe.
> 
> Jérémy

Hi,

there is a new "needs-internet" restriction in autopkgtest, maybe this
will fix one pb