On Sun, Nov 03, 2002 at 06:25:59PM -0500, Jeff Bailey wrote: > On Sun, 2002-11-03 at 09:58, GOTO Masanori wrote: > > > BTW, for debian glibc developer, redhat patch also moves this part to > > posix/Versions. We have 2 way to take action with this issue: > > > > (1) Applying this patch (with some modification), and we keep > > applying until after sarge is released. > > I object to adding the patch - We cannot start a tradition of > compensating for broken software that uses hidden interfaces. Apps are > going to hit this problem on all major arch's. Certainly wine[x] is > working on a patch. I believe all of the new JDKs out there work fine. > Bigloo is the only other program we've had complaints for.
I object to not adding the patch. Just like our other compatibility patches, these binaries are a fact of life; we should prevent exposing the symbols at _link_ time, but there's no benefit to us in hiding them at runtime. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
