Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] glibc-2.12.1
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2010 15:39:00
Message-Id: 201008171734.59882.alan.mckinnon@gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] glibc-2.12.1 by Peter Ruskin
1 On Tuesday 17 August 2010 15:21:35 Peter Ruskin wrote:
2 > On Tuesday 17 August 2010 09:33:09 Alan McKinnon wrote:
3 > > Hi,
4 > >
5 > > Anyone successfully built and using glibc-2.12.1 yet?
6 > >
7 > > I see the tree just pushed an update down from 2.11.2 to 2.12.1,
8 > > and downgrading that package is decidedly non-trivial. Only
9 > > comment I can find at this early stage is flameeye's blog, and
10 > > this makes me quadruple nervous:
11 > >
12 > >
13 > >
14 > >
15 > > And if you say that “the new GLIBC works for me”, are you saying
16 > > that the package itself builds or if it’s actually integrated
17 > > correctly? Because, you know, I used to rebuild the whole system
18 > > whenever I made a change to basic system packages when I
19 > > maintained Gentoo/FreeBSD, and saying that it’s ready for ~arch
20 > > when you haven’t even rebuilt the system (and you haven’t, or you
21 > > would have noticed that m4 was broken) is definitely something
22 > > I’d define as reckless and I’d venture to say you’re not good
23 > > material to work on the quality assurance status.
24 > >
25 > > “correctness” in the case of the system C library would be “it a
26 > > t least leaves the system set building and running”; glibc 2.12
27 > > does not work this way.
28 >
29 > OK here on ~amd64, but you got me worried so I emerged m4 to check
30 > and that went OK too.
31
32
33 I got a couple of replies, all like this one - positive.
34
35 Thanks, all. I'll start the update later on tonight and let 'er run.
36
37
38
39 --
40 alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-user] glibc-2.12.1 Zhu Sha Zang <zhushazang@×××××××××.br>
Re: [gentoo-user] glibc-2.12.1 William Kenworthy <billk@×××××××××.au>