On Tue, 11 Apr 2017 23:28:41 +0100 Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> wrote: > Control: severity -1 important > Control: severity 824442 important > > On Tue, 2017-04-11 at 23:20 +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > > On 2017-04-11 03:35, Ben Hutchings wrote: > > > Control: tag -1 moreinfo > > > > > > On Mon, 10 Apr 2017 10:48:45 +0200 Aurelien Jarno <aurelien@aurel32.net> > > > wrote: > > > [...] > > > > Unfortunately I have been pointed on the libc-alpha mailing list that > > > > it doesn't work if another file which includes <linux/libc-compat.h> > > > > (e.g. <linux/xattr.h>) is included before <net/if.h>. The problem is > > > > that the __UAPI_DEF_IF_* constants are set to 1 in <linux/libc- > > > > compat.h> even if <linux/if.h> is not included. > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > Does this affect any real programs, or is this just theoretical (and > > > therefore should be downgraded)? > > > > It depends what do you mean by real program. I doubt it still affect > > debian packages. The change has been introduced by kernel 4.5, and I > > guess by now all the FTBFS have been fixed. At least for stretch, they > > might be a few left in sid. > > While the fix in the kernel is clearly incomplete, I think it must have > worked for most programs. > > > Now some of the fixes might not have reached upstream yet. > > > > If we consider that acceptable, we can lower the severity of the bugs on > > both the kernel and the glibc side. > > Let's do that. It has now been 5.5 years since the last message to this bug report. What's the status? Should something be done?
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.