-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Neil Williams wrote: [...] > Do the work and come back to the list with > a detailed reasoning for what is a MAJOR packaging decision. This isn't > "yet another customised version of a package" it is a COPY of GLIBC!
Don't shout at me, please. Yes, I am entirely aware of all the issues you raise. However, at this point I am still collecting information. I have no intention of doing *anything* until I know exactly what's going on. Currently I am merely trying to figure out whether upstream's idea of using a customised glibc is possible on Debian; I suspect it's not, but as I haven't actually received an answer to my question yet, it's still rather up in the air... - -- ┌── dg@cowlark.com ─── http://www.cowlark.com ─────────────────── │ │ "There does not now, nor will there ever, exist a programming language in │ which it is the least bit hard to write bad programs." --- Flon's Axiom -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFGzht7f9E0noFvlzgRAgufAJ45Bb0AsCfnWnkAsLEmozlEZrPsRgCfZO3z k6pVrsqtl3pSWbObn5drGWY= =4jv2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----