On Tue, 2005-03-22 at 15:30 +0000, Jamie Lokier wrote:
> Lee Revell wrote:
> > On Tue, 2005-03-22 at 04:48 +0000, Jamie Lokier wrote:
> > > I argued for fixing Glibc on the grounds that the changed kernel
> > > behaviour, or more exactly having Glibc depend on it, loses a certain
> > > semantic property useful for unusual operations on multiple futexes at
> > > the same time. But I appear to have lost the argument, and Jakub's
> > > latest patch does clean up some cruft quite nicely, with no expected
> > > performance hit.
> >
> > A glibc fix will take forever to get to users compared to a kernel fix.
>
> Interesting perspective. On my systems Glibc is upgraded more often
> than the kernel.
>
Blame the Debian maintainers. This bug, reported August 2004, is still
unfixed even in unstable!!!
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=266507
Apparently they think marking a bug "fixed upstream" does something to
solve the problem.
Lee
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
