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

Re: debian/patches review



At Wed, 7 Aug 2002 19:44:43 +0200,
Michael Fedrowitz wrote:
> > glibc22-m68k-compat.dpatch
> > 	2.2 CVS:	not in
> > 	2.3 CVS:	not in
> > 	Comment:	Should be merged within upstream if it's ok.
> > 	Status:		merge
> 
> No, see bug #78937 for details. And I suppose most of it could be
> dropped since 2.0 kernels aren't supported anymore. Only the evil
> compat_symbol hack is still neccassary (might still be old binaries
> around which have been build against glibc-2.1.x) and that part is
> Debian specific.

So, we should keep applying only the below patch as Debian specific?

diff -urN glibc-2.1.95.orig/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/m68k/chown.c glibc-2.1.95/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/m68k/chown.c
--- glibc-2.1.95.orig/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/m68k/chown.c      Fri Sep  1 05:58:10 2000
+++ glibc-2.1.95/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/m68k/chown.c   Sat Oct 14 14:58:38 2000
@@ -72,3 +72,8 @@
 #endif
 }
 weak_alias (__chown, chown)
+
+#include <shlib-compat.h>
+#if SHLIB_COMPAT (libc, GLIBC_2_1, GLIBC_2_2)
+compat_symbol (libc, __chown, chown, GLIBC_2_1);
+#endif

> > glibc22-m68k-fpic.dpatch
> > 	2.2 CVS:	not in
> > 	2.3 CVS:	not in
> > 	Comment:	Should be merged within upstream if it's ok.
> > 	Status:		merge
> 
> Yes, this one would make sense, if upstream will accept it (see bug
> #97663 for what it's all about).

Thanks for your comments, I update 0status.

-- gotom



Reply to: