Re: debian/patches
On Sun, Aug 04, 2002 at 01:20:37PM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote:
> Ben Collins wrote:
> >>BTW, some patches or bugs are already in upstream.
> >>I contacted to Ulrich yesterday when 2.2.6 would be released.
> >>The answer is "not decided yet, working 2.3 is more important".
> >>"update to current 2.2.5+ CVS" means after -13 glibc package stands
> >>on (a) the latest glibc-2-2-branch or (b) 2.3 CVS?
> >>I think in the first we choose (a) is better
> >>(well, tests are needed, but standing on 2002-01-17 is something old).
> >>That leads us not to include the patches pulling out from 2.2/2.3 cvs
> >>one by one. What do you think about it?
> >
> >
> >2.2.5+ means "2.2.5 + 2.2 CVS", otherwise it wouldn't be 2.2.anything,
> >it would be 2.3-cvs.
> >
> >We wont mess with 2.3 until 2.2.90 is released (the first 2.3.0 beta
> >release).
>
> I agree to that confusion should not be occured especially glibc
> until upstream thinks it reaches release stability level.
> OK, we are going to patch 'one by one model' until 2.2.6/2.2.90
> would be released with patch state marking you mentioned.
No, we are going to stay synced with glibc cvs's 2.2 branch. Check the
debian/patches/glibc-cvs.dpatch file. That's going to be synced, in
full.
--
Debian - http://www.debian.org/
Linux 1394 - http://linux1394.sourceforge.net/
Subversion - http://subversion.tigris.org/
Deqo - http://www.deqo.com/
Reply to: