iconvdata regression

[Andreas Jaeger]

On Sunday, April 01, 2012 00:03:59 Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 5:32 PM, David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> 
wrote:
> > From: "Carlos O'Donell" <carlos@systemhalted.org>
> > Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2012 15:28:04 -0400
> > 
> >> Dave, do you have an opinion here?
> > 
> > Since the revert is easy folks to do locally, I suppose it's not that
> > big of a deal if it will be addressed properly on Monday.
> 
> Do we agree that build breakage is *much* more serious since it
> impacts reg testing?

Yes, I do.

IMO giving a grace period for fixing broken stuff is fine and we should 
record what the grace period is - dependend on whether it's a build failure 
or a testsuite one. If somebody is actively working on it promptly, I would 
not revert for a testsuite failure. I'm also fine with reverting patches.

Btw. I commited for Tulin and did not test all of glibc directly (just run 
the testsuite for wcsmbs) and commented that it's broken as well in the 
thread.

I can revert the patch if the testsuite fix takes longer,
Andreas
-- 
 Andreas Jaeger aj@{suse.com,opensuse.org} Twitter/Identica: jaegerandi
  SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
   GF: Jeff Hawn,Jennifer Guild,Felix Imendörffer,HRB16746 (AG Nürnberg)
    GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F  FED1 389A 563C C272 A126