[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: divergence from upstream as a bug

On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 09:39:07AM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Sat, 17 May 2008, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> >... glibc without patches can't work.
> Isn't this the best support for Joey's proposal?
> A software which does not work without patches is IMHO buggy.

Do you have a proposal for a remplacement of the glibc then?

And note we *do* forward patches we apply to the Debian Glibc, which is
not always something pleasant to do, especially when it concerns
"embedded crap" [1]: at best your patch is ignored, at worst you get

That's why I personally don't want another level of administrative task
like proposed by Joey Hess, which won't improve things in that case. We 
already have hundreds of bugs to fix in the Debian Glibc package, I 
don't want to waste my time.

> Despite the technical fact in this specific case it also forces divergences
> between distributions - which is even worse.

Maybe it is worst, but it is actually a wish from upstream. Upstream
Glibc maintainers also manage the RedHat/Fedora branch in the same CVS,
and sometimes doesn't even bother to backport patches from this branch
to the trunk.

[1] This is how Ulrich Drepper names architectures he doesn't want to

  .''`.  Aurelien Jarno	            | GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73
 : :' :  Debian developer           | Electrical Engineer
 `. `'   aurel32@debian.org         | aurelien@aurel32.net
   `-    people.debian.org/~aurel32 | www.aurel32.net

Reply to: