On Tue, Feb 04, 2003 at 02:12:53PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Tue, Feb 04, 2003 at 01:58:59PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 03, 2003 at 11:45:36PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > > > On Mon, Feb 03, 2003 at 05:16:34PM -0700, Debian GLibc CVS Master wrote: > > > > Repository: glibc-package/debian/patches > > > > who: gotom > > > > time: Mon Feb 3 17:16:34 MST 2003 > > > > Log Message: > > > > - debian/patches/0list: Disabled ldso-disable-hwcap.dpatch because > > > > (1) -opt is not provided currently, (2) disabling hwcap is not good > > > > way whether -opt package is installed or not. > > > > > > Um, did you talk to Ben about this? That patch is very important for > > > smooth upgrades. > > > > Leave the patch. Disabling hwcap breaks nothing, since normal libraries > > in /lib:/usr/lib are least common denominator. If you disable this > > patch, we will never be able to start using opt packages. > > Ben, could you look over the current copy of the patch and see if it > does what it used to? I really think the test of __access's return > value is reversed.
In all honesty, it was never tested. However, if it was reversed, then hwcap would not be working on any architectures, would it? -- Debian - http://www.debian.org/ Linux 1394 - http://www.linux1394.org/ Subversion - http://subversion.tigris.org/ Deqo - http://www.deqo.com/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
