On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 09:03:45AM -0400, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Yes. My concern is that glibc is using Rawhide as their continuous > integration sandbox to shake out bugs as opposed to doing it elsewhere and > just taking care of integration of releases when they are ready. If this > viewed as a gap that needs to be fixed, that's fine for now. CI is indeed a gap that needs to be fixed, but rebasing in rawhide isn't nearly as fatal as it seems. The upstream glibc commit policy is quite stringent in that every commit is required to pass an extensive (but obviously not exhaustive) testsuite and as a result it is usually safe (as safe one would consider rawhide) to rebase from the latest commit. I've been doing regular rebases for a while now (almost a year AFAICT) and IIRC we have had just one serious problem last week where i686 boxes got bricked. In the end it was found to be a gcc bug that miscompiled some code in glibc. That said, we still need a nicer way to back out from a broken glibc update into the previous known-to-work glibc similar to how the kernel does it and not need a rescue disk for it. Siddhesh
Attachment:
pgpjbNdcIP4sC.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
