On Fri, Apr 08, 2005 at 10:04:17PM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote: > At Thu, 7 Apr 2005 23:46:51 -0700, > David Mosberger wrote: > > GOTO> I fear to change this interface until sarge release because there > > GOTO> might be another packages that uses sched_setaffinity. > > > > Well, yes, schedutils probably would need updating. I don't know of > > anything else, though. We only care about the Debian packages for > > sarge, I assume, right? If so, couldn't someone do a trivial find > > across all sources for sched_{s,g}et_affinity? I'd be happy to > > volunteer to fix all the packages that are affected (I'm not too > > worried, the number will be very small, I'm sure of that). > > Yes, fixing this issue is not difficult. > > The problem I concerned is the symbol GLIBC_PRIVATE is defined as > GLIBC_2.3.4, not the current symbol GLIBC_2.3.3. I'm not certain this > change does not cause any problems.
It does not; Bastian's patch looks fine to me. I do this for glibc backports on a regular basis. The only thing that might be affected would be GLIBC_PRIVATE, and nothing needs to be compatible with GLIBC_PRIVATE outside the glibc packages. I don't think it will actually affect GLIBC_PRIVATE, either, but I'd have to play around with it to make sure. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery, LLC -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]