21.12.2014 22:26, Markos Chandras пишет: > On 12/21/2014 03:28 PM, William Hubbs wrote: >> All, > >> the following is a comment Mike made about the status of glibc in >> an earlier thread on this list: > >> On Sun, Aug 03, 2014 at 09:16:52AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: >>> upstream glibc has dropped support for older Linux kernels. your >>> choices: - upgrade your kernel - switch to a different C library >>> - stick with glibc-2.19 for a while >>> >>> be warned though there are no plans atm to backport things to >>> glibc-2.19. this includes security fixes, but more importantly as >>> time moves on, making newer gcc versions sanely compile glibc. >>> we've kept older glibc versions around to be nice, and on a part >>> time basis for cross-compiling, but none of those are given >>> priority. i.e. fixes come as people feel like doing them. >>> >>> certainly once glibc-2.20+ goes stable, there is no expectation >>> let alone requirement that packages in the tree be kept working >>> with older glibc versions. the maintenance cost there is >>> unreasonable. >>> >>> i guess if you're stuck on old crap, now would be a good time to >>> start preparing to unstick your crap. glibc-2.20 will most >>> likely be in ~arch in the next 6 months. -mike > >> Since glibc-2.19-r1 is stable everywhere, what I want to know is >> whether we can remove versions *prior* to 2.19-r1 at this point. > >> If we do, that makes it easy to fix bug 478764 [1], because there >> would only be three versions of glibc we have to worry about. > >> thoughts? > >> William > >> [1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=478764 > > > I suppose it makes sense to drop old glibc ebuilds. > >
+1 from me. They also have various security issues(all that are <2.17 are definitely have them) -- Best regards, Sergey Popov Gentoo developer Gentoo Desktop-effects project lead Gentoo Proxy maintainers project lead
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
