[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: glibc

From: Alfred M. Szmidt
Subject: Re: glibc
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 19:18:13 +0100

   Done: <URL:http://sources.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=765>
   Is it correct that this was automatically assigned to
   <URL:mailto:gotom@debian.or.jp>?  At least, I'm not aware of having
   changed anything.

Thank you.  Leave it as default, I think that is OK.

   That one or replacing '-Os' with '-O2' finally made a fresh build
   succeed (or both of them).

No, you MUST USE --without-tls!!!  Your build will NOT WORK(TM).  Just
succeeding in building glibc does not count!  I cannot stress this

   (I did not yet run the test suite, though, but the included
   'bin/getent' etc. works.)

But it will not, you where using the old dynamic linker.

   I needed the attached patches to make it compile. 

Yeah, I knew about those two, been in my tree for ages and never got
around to mailing them.  Including some other fixes...  Need to get
unbusy, hmph.

   Shall I open bugzilla requests for them?  What's the policy for
   such tiny changes?
My policy has always been to send the patch to libc-alpha.  But from
the looks, things have changed now.  Roland, care to enlighten on how
you should report bugs to glibc now?

   and why aren't they noticed by other people?

"They" don't compile or test glibc on GNU/Hurd.

Thanks!  Happy continued hacking!

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]