Bug#156821: Patches for LSB 1.2 compliance
At Wed, 4 Sep 2002 20:12:30 -0500,
Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 01, 2002 at 05:17:43PM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote:
> > I concern ISO-4217.def. ISO-4217.def should be fixed in upstream
> > level... I don't know it's ok or not. Many currency are removed from
> > the list, but the stance of glibc is "if the user exists, and
> > technically right, then put in", IMHO. If this removal stands on
> > "spec does not say about it", then this patch should not apply.
>
> The LSB runtime certification FAQ has the "explanation", it's at:
> http://www.linuxbase.org/test/lsb-runtime-test-faq.html
>
> Andrew Josey's chair of the Austin group so presumably he knows what
> he's talking about when he says it's a "misinterpretation". (I'm not
> sure if glibc agrees, or if I do, but it's what the LSB testsuite needs
> and having them seems less likely to beak anything than not having them)
>
> I haven't passed any of these on to upstream, but Thorsten Kukuk
> probably has.
I recheck the latest glibc (2.2.9x, not 2.2.5), and the things are
all reflected. ISO-4217.def and io/ftw.c are also.
Now we have glibc-2.2.93, and plan to transition into 2.2.9x,
so I think glibc-2.2.93-1.deb can be fixed this bug,
well we re-recheck the patch which Anthony sent when we release
the 2.2.9x.
Regards,
-- gotom
Reply to: