Re: Bits from the RM
At 21 Aug 2003 17:29:16 +0100,
Philip Blundell wrote:
> On Thu, 2003-08-21 at 09:52, GOTO Masanori wrote:
> > My concern is (1) hppa build. If we can't get hppa glibc, we may need
> > to drop it finally...
>
> I don't think the hppa glibc is as inscrutable as all that. The main
> problem seems to be that Carlos is the only person working on the bug,
> and he is only able to devote a limited amount of time to it. If and
> when we get to the point of hppa being the only outstanding glibc issue,
> we will just have to lean on some of the other PA guys to get involved.
Indeed.
My point is hppa is release architecture. So if toolchain and core
library do not work well, then we can't release, or we drop it from
release archs.
> The main problem that is concerning me at the moment is the large number
> of reports of binary incompatibility with older versions. It's all very
> well to dismiss the difficulties with non-free software as somebody
> else's problem, but the fact that so many of these issues are cropping
> up all at once does suggest that glibc itself is doing something wrong.
> However, in absence of a reliable way to reproduce the bug using only
> free software, it is hard to see a way forwards. I will have a play
> with that antique inn that seemed to be experiencing trouble, and see if
> I can get a handle on it like that.
Yes, good point. I forgot to write about this binary incompatibility
issue. It's numbered as (5) from my previous mail, and it's also
concerned item.
Regards,
-- gotom
Reply to: