to file issues for glibc corresponding to any EGLIBC issues that
actually apply to current glibc.
--
Joseph S. Myers
jos...@codesourcery.com
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-glibc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive
in the EGLIBC tracker any more, and anyone interested
to file issues for glibc corresponding to any EGLIBC issues that
actually apply to current glibc.
--
Joseph S. Myers
jos...@codesourcery.com
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-glibc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble
, and anyone interested
to file issues for glibc corresponding to any EGLIBC issues that
actually apply to current glibc.
--
Joseph S. Myers
jos...@codesourcery.com
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-glibc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas
, then remove
it from EGLIBC.
I do not plan to copy any issues from the EGLIBC tracker to the glibc one;
people concerned about particular issues should file corresponding ones in
the glibc tracker as needed.
--
Joseph S. Myers
jos...@codesourcery.com
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-glibc
, and
not at all for others - x86 should be considered much like ARM (an
architecture with no DFP support in GCC) in this regard. (Ideally,
defining __STDC_WANT_DEC_FP__ would cause an error on unsupported
architectures.)
--
Joseph S. Myers
jos...@codesourcery.com
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email
doubt the repository will be going read-only
for a couple of years, as that would be after all FSF glibc branches up to
and including 2.19 are closed, and right now all of 2.15, 2.16 and 2.17
are open.)
--
Joseph S. Myers
jos...@codesourcery.com
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-glibc-requ
On Tue, 20 Dec 2011, peter green wrote:
Joseph S. Myers wrote:
The most obvious users of these definitions would be (native) GDB and
gdbserver - do those still build OK (i.e. include the correct headers to get
the definitions they need and not rely on any definitions that were removed
?
--
Joseph S. Myers
jos...@codesourcery.com
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-glibc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
http://lists.debian.org/pine.lnx.4.64.1112192002051.2...@digraph.polyomino.org.uk
the
(partial) fix for GCC PR 7263. I see no reason this should be
unacceptable for FSF glibc (though one can never entirely predict how the
FSF glibc maintainers will react to a given patch).
--
Joseph S. Myers
jos...@codesourcery.com
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-glibc-requ...@lists.debian.org
, not inline in the header - so meaning that the
ABI compatibility issues *do* arise. Even if you provide a separate
library, as I'd suggest, making the headers namespace-clean is still a
good idea.
--
Joseph S. Myers
jos...@codesourcery.com
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-glibc-requ
fewer than gnome-terminal, but on my system
it's still linked with libcap (POSIX.1e capabilities) and libattr
(extended attributes), neither of which is part of EGLIBC even though both
might be considered to relate to kernel interfaces.
--
Joseph S. Myers
jos...@codesourcery.com
On Sun, 8 Nov 2009, Samuel Thibault wrote:
Joseph S. Myers, le Sun 08 Nov 2009 00:42:29 +, a écrit :
On Fri, 6 Nov 2009, Samuel Thibault wrote:
There is a small error in the pthread_mutex_unlock manpage: as required
by the POSIX norm, recursive mutexes do check that its caller
they are first ready for
mainline development.
I would generally favour being liberal as to what bug fixes are accepted
for a release branch (given that they are in mainline first, do not
involve ABI/API changes and do not require other target-specific changes).
--
Joseph S. Myers
jos...@codesourcery.com
13 matches
Mail list logo
