Ben Collins wrote: >>BTW, some patches or bugs are already in upstream. >>I contacted to Ulrich yesterday when 2.2.6 would be released. >>The answer is "not decided yet, working 2.3 is more important". >>"update to current 2.2.5+ CVS" means after -13 glibc package stands >>on (a) the latest glibc-2-2-branch or (b) 2.3 CVS? >>I think in the first we choose (a) is better >>(well, tests are needed, but standing on 2002-01-17 is something old). >>That leads us not to include the patches pulling out from 2.2/2.3 cvs >>one by one. What do you think about it? > > > 2.2.5+ means "2.2.5 + 2.2 CVS", otherwise it wouldn't be 2.2.anything, > it would be 2.3-cvs. > > We wont mess with 2.3 until 2.2.90 is released (the first 2.3.0 beta > release).
I agree to that confusion should not be occured especially glibc until upstream thinks it reaches release stability level. OK, we are going to patch 'one by one model' until 2.2.6/2.2.90 would be released with patch state marking you mentioned. -- gotom -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
