Re: Accepted eglibc 2.11.3-4+deb6u10 (source all amd64) into squeeze-lts
El 12/02/16 a las 20:42, Brian May escribió:
> Matus UHLAR - fantomas <email@example.com> writes:
> > yes, there was:
> > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=814078
> Is the BTS the appropriate place for these bugs? I don't think they come
> to the LTS team who need to see them.
> Look the same???
> No, because in upstream __secure_getenv is part of GLIBC_PRIVATE, in
> squeeze __secure_getenv was part of GLIBC_2.0 - So we end up putting the
> code in a different spot. You can't tell this for certain just by
> looking at the patch (although the references to the public symbols
> should be a hint).
> I am guessing this is because they were more conservative with what they
> use GLIBC_PRIVATE for back in the time of squeeze.
> Question is: Is it worth fixing this? As it is extra symbols, I don't
> think it can cause any breakage other then with already running
> processes. Especially as squeeze-lts support will be ending soon.
> Brian May <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Really sorry, I needed to be even more careful. But as you said, I don't
think it is worth to fix it giving the context.
I'll send the regression DLA.