This is the mail archive of the 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]

Re: [PATCH] Remove PRI_MACROS_BROKEN define usage

On 05/02/2014 11:12 AM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Fri, 2 May 2014, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
>> Even though Steve Ellcey has gotten upstream to change the code
>> such that PRI_MACROS_BROKEN is always defined, there is no stable
>> release with that change yet.
> I don't think gettext releases are relevant to us; it's the development 
> sources of glibc's libintl that we should aim to have in sync with the 
> development sources of gettext's libintl, by merging local changes in both 
> directions and implementing things in such a way that identical code can 
> work in both places.

May I suggest the following plan of action then?

* Merge libintl (official release) into glibc and fixup
  where appropriate, testing the result.

    * Pro: You know libitinl works because it's a released version.
    * Con: Subsequent merge from glibc to gettext is harder.

* Review remaining differences between glibc master and gettext
  master and propose patches.

This reduces the merge-in risk of breaking glibc by using
a stable gettext, but allows us to iterate down to zero 

The differences aren't large, but they still have
new generic lock thread support, and pathname support, and
merging this in worries me slightly. That worry is why I
recommend a conservative first step.

Are you suggesting that this is really just a waste of time
given libintl's stability and doing the above is just 2x
the work for no reward?


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