On Tue, 2005-03-22 at 15:30 +0000, Jamie Lokier wrote: > Lee Revell wrote: > > On Tue, 2005-03-22 at 04:48 +0000, Jamie Lokier wrote: > > > I argued for fixing Glibc on the grounds that the changed kernel > > > behaviour, or more exactly having Glibc depend on it, loses a certain > > > semantic property useful for unusual operations on multiple futexes at > > > the same time. But I appear to have lost the argument, and Jakub's > > > latest patch does clean up some cruft quite nicely, with no expected > > > performance hit. > > > > A glibc fix will take forever to get to users compared to a kernel fix. > > Interesting perspective. On my systems Glibc is upgraded more often > than the kernel. >
Blame the Debian maintainers. This bug, reported August 2004, is still unfixed even in unstable!!! http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=266507 Apparently they think marking a bug "fixed upstream" does something to solve the problem. Lee - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
