Re: What version of glibc in Hamm?
Dale Scheetz writes:
> > Will this upgrade not imply that we recompile and test the whole of
> > the dist, to make it sure hamm is self-compilable ? If not, every
> > bugfix upload will possibly break something because of a possible
> > glibc change...
>
> You may be confusing 2.0.7 with 2.1.X, which is getting many changes.
I'm afraid not. Some time ago, I was still using 2.0.6 for my
uploads, 'cause I don't like this idea of a pre-release in hamm, and
was waiting for a final version to come. I was then reported a bug
because e2fsprogs did not compile with 2.0.7pre1 ! This turned out to
be a change in include files, for which Ulrich assumed that user-level
programs should (usually) not include files from <linux/...>. This
type of things makes me think we have a high probability of getting
into trouble once more...
> The 2.0.7 CVS tree is still accepting bug fix patches, so the only
> difference between 2.0.7pre3 and 2.0.7 will be that more of the critical
> bugs on glibc will be fixed. Even those programs that show bugs with the
> current glibc will probably not need recompiling to gain the fixes in the
> shared libraries.
Maybe, but 2.0.7pre3 is not what we have in hamm. It's pre1. I don't
see it as a good idea to switch from pre1 to final while in the deep
freeze.
> [on Debian] the upgrade from 2.0.6 to 2.0.7 goes very smoothly.
Nice to hear that, anyway.
--
Yann Dirson <ydirson@mygale.org> | Stop making M$-Bill richer & richer,
isp-email: <ydirson@a2points.com> | support Debian GNU/Linux:
debian-email: <dirson@debian.org> | more powerful, more stable !
http://www.mygale.org/~ydirson/ | Check <http://www.debian.org/>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: