Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Markos Chandras <hwoarang@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o, vapier@g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: glibc versions prior to 2.19-r1
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2014 19:26:36
Message-Id: 54971EDA.7090403@gentoo.org
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] rfc: glibc versions prior to 2.19-r1 by William Hubbs
1 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
2 Hash: SHA512
3
4 On 12/21/2014 03:28 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
5 > All,
6 >
7 > the following is a comment Mike made about the status of glibc in
8 > an earlier thread on this list:
9 >
10 > On Sun, Aug 03, 2014 at 09:16:52AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
11 >> upstream glibc has dropped support for older Linux kernels. your
12 >> choices: - upgrade your kernel - switch to a different C library
13 >> - stick with glibc-2.19 for a while
14 >>
15 >> be warned though there are no plans atm to backport things to
16 >> glibc-2.19. this includes security fixes, but more importantly as
17 >> time moves on, making newer gcc versions sanely compile glibc.
18 >> we've kept older glibc versions around to be nice, and on a part
19 >> time basis for cross-compiling, but none of those are given
20 >> priority. i.e. fixes come as people feel like doing them.
21 >>
22 >> certainly once glibc-2.20+ goes stable, there is no expectation
23 >> let alone requirement that packages in the tree be kept working
24 >> with older glibc versions. the maintenance cost there is
25 >> unreasonable.
26 >>
27 >> i guess if you're stuck on old crap, now would be a good time to
28 >> start preparing to unstick your crap. glibc-2.20 will most
29 >> likely be in ~arch in the next 6 months. -mike
30 >
31 > Since glibc-2.19-r1 is stable everywhere, what I want to know is
32 > whether we can remove versions *prior* to 2.19-r1 at this point.
33 >
34 > If we do, that makes it easy to fix bug 478764 [1], because there
35 > would only be three versions of glibc we have to worry about.
36 >
37 > thoughts?
38 >
39 > William
40 >
41 > [1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=478764
42 >
43
44 I suppose it makes sense to drop old glibc ebuilds.
45
46 - --
47 Regards,
48 Markos Chandras
49 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
50 Version: GnuPG v2
51
52 iQF8BAEBCgBmBQJUlx7ZXxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w
53 ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXRGRDlGMzA4MUI2MzBDODQ4RDBGOEYxMjQx
54 RjEwRUQ0QjgxREVCRjE5AAoJEB8Q7UuB3r8ZCJ4H/0coofEKcsika34IaHI609gR
55 Q2ZOhmcgV82wu6zwpIRVQaIDFCfo170c1g6OfffaaVLpu6VrvlN0lOxA0s2fPVuk
56 pyf3ZjmElVyhncPtfCBIlygfvdabEv5UCEi8dgOe59tz6SyXarvRdKdQOsWy8yRx
57 38LGDH/vcmlcTbVKXfKuNPZ52hhfTspw7/QDxIqwufDqXaFV/sP+nLRTWKlK293I
58 twO6biE3m60ggwaEyL5+LT4ZQZTQ2MnfDpBD8Rr1+xPwIj7rvgbJCVul1B1NZq6m
59 gxYS078K8SeSEroum4wrZKj6OI8oIAic7Apa9wpp+tDXPOMYYn7SxvNtOBVpa/w=
60 =rlNJ
61 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: glibc versions prior to 2.19-r1 Sergey Popov <pinkbyte@g.o>