NOTICE: these changes must not be uploaded to unstable yet!

Dear maintainer,

As part of the 64-bit time_t transition required to support 32-bit
architectures in 2038 and beyond
(https://wiki.debian.org/ReleaseGoals/64bit-time), we have identified
sysprof as a source package shipping runtime libraries whose ABI
either is affected by the change in size of time_t, or could not be
analyzed via abi-compliance-checker (and therefore to be on the safe
side we assume is affected).

To ensure that inconsistent combinations of libraries with their
reverse-dependencies are never installed together, it is necessary to
have a library transition, which is most easily done by renaming the
runtime library package.

Since turning on 64-bit time_t is being handled centrally through a change
to the default dpkg-buildflags (https://bugs.debian.org/1037136), it is
important that libraries affected by this ABI change all be uploaded close
together in time.  Therefore I have prepared a 0-day NMU for sysprof
which will initially be uploaded to experimental if possible, then to
unstable after packages have cleared binary NEW.

Please find the patch for this NMU attached.

If you have any concerns about this patch, please reach out ASAP.  Although
this package will be uploaded to experimental immediately, there will be a
period of several days before we begin uploads to unstable; so if information
becomes available that your package should not be included in the transition,
there is time for us to amend the planned uploads.

It feels easiest to me to do the uploads to Unstable for the Debian
GNOME packages. We had pending changes in git for some of them. Even
when we didn't, I still need to do manual pushing to git repos for
NMUs. Therefore, I am unsetting the pending tag as suggested by Steve
today in #debian-release.

Thank you,
Jeremy Bícha

Please find attached an updated patch rebased on current unstable.

Control: tags -1 + wontfix

I'm pretty sure this one is actually unnecessary...

... because these symbols clearly have no time_t in them.

Looking at build logs in
https://adrien.dcln.fr/misc/armhf-time_t/2024-02-22T21%3A03%3A00/logs/libsysprof-6-dev/
it seems like the test-build is onky failing because sysprof has headers that
are valid as C but not valid as C++. This is new since libsysprof-4, which
was the version that was tested successfully during the early phases of
this transition.

This unconditional use of restrict seems like a bug, I'll report it
upstream.

https://salsa.debian.org/vorlon/armhf-time_t/-/merge_requests/138 makes
this package compile successfully during the ABI check.

    smcv

https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/sysprof/-/issues/114, fix proposed in
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/sysprof/-/merge_requests/88.

    smcv

Thanks, this has worked its way through the system and sysprof is now off
our list of packages to NMU.  Closing.