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

Bug#666774: eglibc: Updated hppa patch set for version 2.13



tag 666774 - moreinfo
thanks

Le 02/04/2012 13:57, John David Anglin a écrit :
> On 2-Apr-12, at 4:40 AM, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> 
>> tag 666774 + moreinfo
>> thanks
>>
>> Le 01/04/2012 20:48, Dave Anglin a écrit :
>>> Source: eglibc
>>> Version: 2.13-27
>>> Severity: important
>>> Tags: patch
>>>
>>> The following five patches will be attached to the report:
>>> core-2011-08-31.diff
>>> ports-2011-08-31.diff
>>> ports-2011-09-17.diff
>>> ports-2011-10-30.diff
>>> ports-2012-03-31.diff
>>>
>>> core-2011-08-31.diff replaces hppa/local-stack-grows-up.diff.
>>> hppa/local-stack-grows-up.diff must be deleted first.  The
>>> core patch addresses stack grows up issues.
>>>
>>> The ports patches must be applied in order of date.  They address
>>> a variety of issues (e.g., udev bootstrap failure due to incorrect
>>> flags, various pthread condition failures).
>>>
>>> The patches have been collected from messages posted to the parisc
>>> linux mailing list, and from private work with Carlos O'Donell.
>>> I have adjusted the original patches so that they apply to 2.13.
>>>
>>> Aurelien, would you please apply these changes?
>>>
>>
>> Thanks for theses patches. However it seems most of them are already
>> present in the Debian package. Against which version are there  
>> supposed
>> to work? The best would be to get these patches against the current
>> Debian package.
> 
> 
> As noted, the core-2011-08-31.diff patch replaces local-stack-grows- 
> up.diff.
> The new content in it helps to fix the former pthread condition test  
> failures.

Ok, I read it too fast then. I have to say i don't really like the new
filenames, as they don't really say what the patch contains beside not
being compliant with our policy.

> The "ports" patches are completely new.

Ok, thank we'll have a look at that for the next upload.

-- 
Aurelien Jarno                          GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73
aurelien@aurel32.net                 http://www.aurel32.net



Reply to: