* Alan Cox <alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > So it's good enough to be in Fedora/RHEL but not good enough to be in > > upstream glibc? How is that possible? Isnt that a double standard? > > Yes its a double standard > > Glibc has a higher standard than Fedora/RHEL. > > Just like the Ubuntu kernel ships various ugly unfit for upstream kernel > drivers. There's a world of a difference between a fugly driver and a glibc patch. Also, we tend to upstream even fugly kernel drivers if they are important and are deployed by a major distro - see Noveau. > > kernel's fault. But glibc is certainly not being helpful in that situation > > either and your earlier claim that you are only waiting for the patches is > > rather dishonest. > > I am sure Ulrich is being totally honest, but send him the patches and > you'll find out. Plus you will learn what the API should look like when you > try and create them ... I was there and extended/fixed bits of the kaio/libaio code when they were written so yes i already know something about it. To say that the glibc reaction was less than enthusiastic back then is a strong euphemism ;-) So after 8 years some of the bits made its way into Fedora/RHEL. I think this is a pretty good demonstration of the points i made ;-) Thanks, Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
