Re: debian/patches review
At Thu, 8 Aug 2002 09:44:39 -0400,
Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> > glibc22-hppa-unwind.dpatch
> > 2.2 CVS: not in
> > 2.3 CVS: not in
> > Comment: After checking it's ok or not, then submit to upstream
> > if it's correct. This patch is applied only kernel
> > version lower checking.
> > Status: merge
>
> Checking for 2.4.0 is bad... major bugs removed from this kernel.
> Checking for 2.4.4 is arbitrary and reflects on the nature of this patches age.
> Check for 2.4.9 is recommended since our 0.9.3 ISO shipped with that kernel.
> We shipped 2.4.17/18 with woody.
So, changing checking for 2.4.4 -> 2.4.9 is more appropriate?
> > glibc22-hppa-pthreads.dpatch
> > 2.2 CVS: not in
> > 2.3 CVS: not in
> > Comment: ? Ben?
> > Status: unknown
>
> This is requied for pthreads to work on HPPA. There are number of things
> that had to be changed, including the fact that hppa can't use int and
> needs __atomic_lock_t. Also spinlocks don't get assigned 0 but rather
> __ATOMIC_LOCK_INIT. These changes alone mandate lots of one liners.
OK, change mark as 'should be sent to upstream author'.
> > glibc22-hppa-rela.dpatch
> > 2.2 CVS: not in
> > 2.3 CVS: not in
> > Comment: ? Ben?
> > Status: unknown
>
> We need some extra info e.g. "struct link_map *map" to do R_PARISC_RELATIVE
> reloc's. This requires that we pass the *map in all the required calls.
> Is this correct Ben?
So, how to handle this patch? Sending this to upstream is OK?
> Note:
> It seems that the changelog entries for the addition of the hppa .dpatch's
> is missing? I only found mention of Randolph's glibc22-hppa-tests.dpatch.
> Is ther any way we can get these added? Surely upstream won't merge anything
> without appropriate changelog entries. Matthew Wilcox has noted that the .dpatch's
> had changelog entries in our old tree, it just seems they were missed when
> being placed into the debian glibc tree.
If you have changelog entries in your old tree, then could you tell
me where they can be gotten? Adding the changelog into .dpatch seems
good idea. Well, we should be careful to write changelog...
Thanks Carlos. And Michael, and Ben. I update 0status, and repost it!
-- gotom
Reply to: