uClibc 0.9.29-rc1 posted, should be final end of week

Bernhard Fischer rep.dot.nop at gmail.com
Wed Apr 18 07:18:40 UTC 2007


On Tue, Apr 17, 2007 at 11:54:35PM -0400, Rob Landley wrote:
>On Tuesday 17 April 2007 9:33 am, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> after much pushing and proding and looks of disappointments of missed 
>> deadlines, 0.9.29-rc1 is up
>
>Well, technically 0.9.29_rc1 is up.  Still: Yay!
>
>> idea is to get the main things squashed and tag final end of this week at 
>> which point we'll branch
>> 
>> then we'll look at the 0.9.29.z series as we get nptl merged into trunk
>> -mike
>
>Ok, you tagged 18471 as 0.9.29-rc1.  Since then, some small tweaks have been 
>made:
>
>vapier moved the web pages out of svn (presumably into its own repository).
>vapier reverted the -fsigned-char thing discussed on the list.
>vapier did a nommu fix to ldso.
>vapier did some whitespace fixes.
>vapier did a bugfix to ldconfig.
>
>All good.
>
>What concerns me is the enormous gratuitous change (svn 18480) aldot made that 
>added a new config option that has _nothing_ to do with the checkin comment, 
>made huge changes to four different files, and is justified as code 
>shrinkage, not a fix.  Is that the kind of thing that should go in during a 
>feature freeze?  (I'm not saying it's a bad patch, I'm saying it seems like a 

I explicitely asked vapier if it was ok to checkin at this point in
time. These hunks were lying around locally and i just forgot to apply
them when vapier ACKed them back then. Since he reACKed them just before
i applied them (you were even online at that time, so you should have
seen us talking), i don't see the problem?

>bad time to check in a largeish change for something learly optional which 
>isn't something I can glance at and feel comfortable I understand what it 
>does.)



More information about the uClibc mailing list