On Tue, Aug 10, 2004 at 04:48:17PM -0400, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > > >Yeah. There are lots of strange things to be found in userland. Like > > > >openssl assuming that linux-elf == i386, for example. > > > > > > > >OK, so how do I go from here? Should I just submit all my patches to > > > >bugzilla and wait? > > > > > > - File against each component in product "Fedora Core". > > > > OK, my binutils patch just got rejected because "Fedora Core 2 isn't > > ported to the ARM." > > If you have FC2 based port, please keep the patch local to the ARM port > (say have binutils-2.15.90.0.3-5xscale.src.rpm instead of what was shipped > in FC2 - e.g. Fedora Core SPARC port does the same). OK, so the question was, if the goal would be to have my patches integrated into FC3, should I have submitted them to devel/test1 instead of to '2'? > I don't think it is a good idea to issue FC2 updates just because there > was an ARM patch added, FC2 users on i386/x86-64 would IMHO definitely > not appreciate having to download the updates with zero changes. Sure, that makes sense. I'm a bit new to this bugzilla stuff, sorry. > binutils in FC3 will be 2.15.91.0.2 (~end of July '04) or later, so the > patch in question is definitely there for FC3. You wrote that in the bugzilla entry too -- good to hear, thank you very much. cheers, Lennert
