Andrew,
On 07/21/13 00:27, Andrew Suffield wrote:
Things from my past coming back to haunt me, but if people want to
keep ccing me...
On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 10:15:25PM +0200, Michael Kerrisk wrote:
Yes. I've never been quite sure though whether the particular
kernel versions to specify
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 08:28:43PM +0200, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
Yup, I already noticed that older LD_ASSUME_KERNEL values
gave results such as the above. However, I was not sure
of the intention of your response? Did you mean that the
proposed text should be changed? If so, could
On 07/18/13 22:13, Simon Paillard wrote:
Hi Michael,
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 01:52:56PM +0200, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 7:42 PM, Simon Paillard spaill...@debian.org wrote:
(but no more LD_ASSUME_KERNEL).
I just drafted the following for ld.so.8 in
Things from my past coming back to haunt me, but if people want to
keep ccing me...
On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 10:15:25PM +0200, Michael Kerrisk wrote:
Yes. I've never been quite sure though whether the particular
kernel versions to specify for LD_ASSUME_KERNEL when
selecting the threading
Hi Michael,
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 01:52:56PM +0200, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 7:42 PM, Simon Paillard spaill...@debian.org wrote:
(but no more LD_ASSUME_KERNEL).
I just drafted the following for ld.so.8 in man-pages:
LD_ASSUME_KERNEL
On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 7:42 PM, Simon Paillard spaill...@debian.org wrote:
(but no more LD_ASSUME_KERNEL).
I just drafted the following for ld.so.8 in man-pages:
LD_ASSUME_KERNEL
(glibc since 2.2.3) Each shared library can inform the
dynamic linker of the
reassign 564874 manpages,libc-bin
thanks
On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 11:38:15AM +, Andrew Suffield wrote:
Package: manpages
Version: 3.23-1
Severity: normal
The current ld.so manpage is from glibc. It's gratuitously out of date
and just plain wrong in places. The one in manpages is current
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 5:42 AM, Simon Paillard spaill...@debian.org wrote:
reassign 564874 manpages,libc-bin
thanks
On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 11:38:15AM +, Andrew Suffield wrote:
Package: manpages
Version: 3.23-1
Severity: normal
The current ld.so manpage is from glibc. It's
Michael Kerrisk wrote:
For info: Jonathan Neider, CCed was looking at integrating those
pieces of the Debian libc-bin page that were missing from the upstream
man-pages ld.so.8 page. We did upstream one piece already, but I'm not
sure what Jonathan's current plans are for further work.
reassign 564874 manpages 3.23-1
quit
Simon Paillard wrote:
I concur, but we need agreement of libc-bin maintainers.
Reassigning to manpages, since this couldn't be fixed by a change in
eglibc alone (or in other words: to unconfuse debbugs[1]). If you
think the page is ready already, then
Package: manpages
Version: 3.23-1
Severity: normal
The current ld.so manpage is from glibc. It's gratuitously out of date
and just plain wrong in places. The one in manpages is current and
reasonably accurate. Please arrange for the version from manpages to
be shipped instead of the glibc
11 matches
Mail list logo
