This is the mail archive of the glibc-bugs@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

[Bug libc/11875] 'make' fails even though 'configure' is OK


------- Additional Comments From sergstesh at yahoo dot com  2010-08-05 18:48 -------
(In reply to comment #16)
> Sergei, your tone will not help you in this bugreport.  Please calm down before
> commenting again.
> 
> Did you read the initial description of bug 333?
> 
> Nobody says that there's not a bug - what Roland and Ulrich say is: You're on
> your own and have to investigate it yourself - and that's what you did!
> 
> http://www.gnu.org/software/libc/resources.html lists the libc-alpha mailing
> list. A friendly email with your findings is more than welcome.
> 
> Btw. 2.12.1 was released in July, the tar ball is just newer.
> 
> *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 333 ***


I don't give a damn about bug333.

The officially claimed advantage of _open_ source is that users are saved from
proprietary vendor lock0in because they can always build from source and modify
it if/when necessary.

RedHat with its lieutenant Mr. Ulrich Drepper through bug333 perpetuate _open_
source vendor lock-in. Bugs in build mechanism are not even considered. A simple
phrase: "yes, it's a bug, make sure your 'as' supports 'gnu_indirect_function'
is _not_ said.

And if you do not like my tone - I still remember Mr. Ulrich Drepper saying I
didn't understand what I was doing and that building 'glibc' is not for everyone.





-- 


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11875

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]