Re: GNU libc

[Ulrich Drepper <drepper@sl-kb05.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de>]

Vincent Renardias <vincent@waw.com> writes:

> > It probably doesn't make a big difference either way.  There is a
> > slight benefit to using the version provided by glibc in that there is
> > one less upstream source to track.
> 
> 	I think keeping the glibc version would be better, since it also 
> reduce the number of source packages in the distribution; and since we 
> have to deal with the source package of glibc, let's use it to generate 
> one more binary package...

I would suggest you use the version from glibc.  Why duplicate the
work?  I have to track the tz mailing lists and I normally update the
glibc sources in the next 24 hours after I got the announcement of a
new version.  Beside this, the tzcode in glibc is often updated before
the changes get into the official version.

I don't know whether it makes sense to distribute this part of glibc
in a separate package.  I don't think so but you'll know better.

-- Uli
---------------.      drepper@cygnus.com  ,-.   Rubensstrasse 5
Ulrich Drepper  \    ,-------------------'   \  76149 Karlsruhe/Germany
Cygnus Solutions `--' drepper@gnu.ai.mit.edu  `------------------------