the setrlimit changes in glibc 2.1.3

[Andreas Jaeger]

>>>>> Roland McGrath writes:

 > So I think the real question here is, what warranted this kind of change in
 > a "bug-fix" release?  I think folks around here have gotten pretty unclear
 > on the concept of maintenance releases, and everybody's playing fast and loose.

After working some more time with the 32bit UID support, I'd like to
apologize for proposing the 32bit UID support for glibc 2.1.x.  I was
outvetoed - but now I'm convinced that the patches shouldn't go into
2.1[1].

 > This is just not the way to operate.  That's why we have a development
 > branch, for pete's sake.  Are we going to have to add another level of ".x"
 > to the versions to get a truly conservative maintenance release branch?

 > And, Mark: I'm afraid the realities of packaging systems (and of humans)
 > make it hopelessly unwise to attempt to have "the right thing" for anyone
 > be to upgrade their shared libraries differently than they upgrade their
 > development environment.

Andreas

Footnotes: 
[1]  But they should go into 2.2 to get further testing.
-- 
 Andreas Jaeger
  SuSE Labs aj@suse.de
   private aj@arthur.rhein-neckar.de