On 19 Apr 2016 08:15, Michał Górny wrote: > On Tue, 19 Apr 2016 01:41:06 -0400 Mike Frysinger wrote: > > On 19 Apr 2016 04:21, Mart Raudsepp wrote: > > > Ühel kenal päeval, E, 18.04.2016 kell 12:38, kirjutas Mike Frysinger: > > > > On 16 Apr 2016 09:23, Patrick Lauer wrote: > > > > > So why on earth are we applying a random patch that upstream is not > > > > > using > > > > > > > > not everyone uses glibc, and glibc *is* moving in this > > > > direction. Gentoo > > > > is simply accelerating the change ... otherwise glibc will take > > > > longer to do the actual migration. > > > > > > You don't need to break everyone's ~arch for dubious glibc benefits, > > > which could be done by a p.masked version and a tinderbox run. > > > I am not your tinderbox dummy having to waste time on this to maintain > > > my own ~arch stuff. > > > > i waited until the known bugs died down. i don't have access to a > > tinderbox system myself. > > Cut the nonsense. You clearly didn't even test that glibc version > on a single system. If you did, you'd notice the core system packages > failing to build.
i know it's asking a lot of you, but you should refrain from making claims that not only do you obviously have no idea about but can also be trivially refuted. i run glibc versions starting before i commit them to the tree and build/test packages against it constantly. this box has built hundreds of packages and if you look at the git tree, i fixed a number of packages before anyone even saw the breakage. -mike
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
