[Aboriginal] Opinions about reverting uClibc to cut a release?

[David Seikel]

On Thu, 14 Apr 2011 15:03:28 -0500 Rob Landley <rlandley at parallels.com>
wrote:

> Getting uClibc-NPTL to work is going to take buckets of debugging
> (even x86-64 doesn't work properly for me at the moment), and it's
> been too long since the last release.  (Even if this next one hasn't
> got much in it.)
> 
> I could revert in two ways:
> 
> 1) built the pthreads version of uClibc-NPTL, which is still a
> significant regression but not as bad of one.  (I.E. some stuff
> works.)
> 
> 2) revert back to uClibc-0.9.31 (resurrecting a half-dozen patches),
> and then put uClibc-rc3 back after the release.
> 
> I'm leaning towards #1 since it's just a one line config change in
> sources/baseconfig-uClibc, but it does mean that LFS doesn't build to
> completion on any target anymore.  (I hate these "must step back to
> make progress" situations, but switching from pthreads to NPTL is
> kind of necessary long-term, and a heck of a lot of pain in the
> short-term getting uClibc to pass this kidney stone...)

Number 1 gets my vote, but for no particular reason.

-- 
A big old stinking pile of genius that no one wants
coz there are too many silver coated monkeys in the world.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.landley.net/pipermail/aboriginal-landley.net/attachments/20110415/518075ac/attachment-0003.pgp>