Latest Glibc from CVS has segmentation problems.

[Scott Lamb]

On Mar 7, 2004, at 3:16 PM, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:

>    It seems that such reports of errors and omissions in INSTALL are
>    no longer welcome. In fact, I almost wonder if the user community
>    would be better served by replacing the entire contents of INSTALL
>    with "Don't", possibly followed by "And if you absolutely must,
>    copy what the distribution makers do."
>
> They are quite welcome, when someone sends a patch for them, not when
> someone bitches about it without doing any work.  Nobody has even
> tried to update the INSTALL here, or actually suggested improvements
> for it.

No, I don't believe that's true, for several reasons:

- the INSTALL document said to _report_ errors and omissions, which to 
me implies less than a patch. (Even just a "I don't understand X; 
please clarify the manual.") Ulrich's email (broadly) listed many 
differences between the current best practices and the INSTALL document 
and noted his unwillingness to take the time to put them into that 
document.

- Ulrich mentioned in his last email an external website. I think the 
key reason he was more amenable to that was that it was something other 
people could change constantly (and eventually give up on, if he's 
correct) without his involvement at all. He's quite thorough about 
reviewing patches before applying, so this is significantly less work 
for him.

- I've previously sent in a patch to the manual pages and been ignored. 
(Which are clearly relevant to a broader base of users than the INSTALL 
document.) Maybe my patch was no good or I submitted it in the wrong 
way, but I'd at least taken the effort to prepare one. Without even 
knowing why it was ignored, I will never do so again, and I'm not about 
to suggest to anyone else that they waste their time in a similar way.

Scott