This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: glibc 2.20 status?
- From: Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf at tilera dot com>
- To: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>, Carlos O'Donell <carlos at redhat dot com>
- Cc: GNU C Library <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>, Allan McRae <allan at archlinux dot org>, Siddhesh Poyarekar <siddhesh at redhat dot com>, Roland McGrath <roland at hack dot frob dot com>, Andreas Schwab <schwab at linux-m68k dot org>, David Holsgrove <david dot holsgrove at xilinx dot com>, Kaz Kojima <kkojima at rr dot iij4u dot or dot jp>, Thomas Schwinge <thomas at codesourcery dot com>, Andreas Jaeger <aj at suse dot com>, Maxim Kuvyrkov <maxim at kugelworks dot com>, Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com>
- Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2014 11:24:52 -0400
- Subject: Re: glibc 2.20 status?
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <54071FF4 dot 2090203 at redhat dot com> <Pine dot LNX dot 4 dot 64 dot 1409031504410 dot 11036 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk>
On 9/3/2014 11:06 AM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Wed, 3 Sep 2014, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
Allan,
What's the status of 2.20?
Are -Wundef fixes and machine maintainer testing
all that blocks the release?
I think the -Wundef fixes are far too risky to include at this point.
They should go in (once reviewed) early in development for 2.21 so that
there is plenty of time for any subtle issues to emerge before they enter
a release. And I don't think we should be blocking things on lack of
machine status now either; there's been plenty of time for machine
maintainers to provide their status.
I am investigating one outstanding issue on tilegx and hope to have a fix today.
Summer vacation certainly got in the way of 2.20 responsiveness for me, and perhaps others were similarly affected?
--
Chris Metcalf, Tilera Corp.
http://www.tilera.com