Re: divergence from upstream as a bug
Mike Hommey a écrit :
> On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 12:03:17PM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
>> 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" : 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.
> Isn't Ulrich Drepper RH/Fedora glibc maintainer ?
.''`. Aurelien Jarno | GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73
: :' : Debian developer | Electrical Engineer
`. `' email@example.com | firstname.lastname@example.org
`- people.debian.org/~aurel32 | www.aurel32.net