This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: Fixes for 2.15.1
On Thu, 23 Feb 2012, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > commit fb59b3a4f54777652dc877a1df0fcc009b741d87
> > Author: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
> > Date: Thu Feb 16 14:56:54 2012 -0800
> >
> > Add O_FSYNC define to sparc just like other platforms.
>
> I'd call this harmless but not really necessary. Strictly speaking, it's a
> feature addition. OTOH, given that there hasn't really been a 2.15 release
> at all yet, we can be less strict than usual minor-release rules.
I call it a bug fix - any non-deliberate difference in the APIs exposed by
the headers on different GNU/Linux architectures being a bug. Bug 13747
filed for the backport.
> > commit 7c35ffedf144417ba2787322c7b75b4db5c3cb7a
> > Author: Thomas Schwinge <thomas@codesourcery.com>
> > Date: Fri Feb 10 21:05:54 2012 +0100
> >
> > Fix x86 PLT slot usage for feraiseexcept.
> >
> > Then we're elf/check-localplt.out-clean again.
>
> I'd say yes.
Bug 13748 filed for the backport.
> > commit af850b1c978bdca648ef9fb141e785d75f74d9bf
> > Author: Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>
> > Date: Thu Feb 9 11:21:47 2012 -0800
> >
> > Use <> for include of kernel-features.h.
>
> This might be necessary for ports to have a working release (not sure).
> Certainly ought to be harmless. I'd say yes.
Bug 13749 filed for the backport.
> > didn't look at what might be backport-appropriate in the ports repository;
>
> Should be up to each port maintainer.
I checked for the ports I maintained and cherry-picked one patch.
> > and didn't look at the question of backporting libc changes needed for the
> > Tile ports.
>
> If the tile ports went in using GLIBC_2.15 then it might be appropriate.
Yes, the ports did go in the ports repository for 2.15. I'll leave it to
Chris to file any backport requests wanted.
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com