[ only speaking for myself ]
On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 11:05:53PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
>...
> The consequence is that in order to build 32-bit-time_t libraries
> (Gtk, for example), an old glibc needs to be kept around. In
> practice, it would probably mean that it is impossible to
Your message dated Fri, 19 Jul 2019 14:44:53 +0200
with message-id <20190719124453.gb2...@aurel32.net>
and subject line Re: Bug#932384: libc6: utmp broken
has caused the Debian Bug report #932384,
regarding libc6: utmp broken
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has
Aurelien Jarno dixit:
[ explanations ]
>Therefore there is no bug, neither in glibc nor in the manpage. Closing
>it.
Agreed. Thank you for reviewing the problem, though.
bye,
//mirabilos
--
15:41⎜ Somebody write a testsuite for helloworld :-)
* Adrian Bunk:
> [ only speaking for myself ]
>
> On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 11:05:53PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
>>...
>> The consequence is that in order to build 32-bit-time_t libraries
>> (Gtk, for example), an old glibc needs to be kept around. In
>> practice, it would probably mean that it
On Fri, 19 Jul 2019 at 15:13:00 +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> Remaining usecases of i386 will be old binaries, some old Linux binaries
> but especially old software (including many games) running in Wine.
> Old Linux binaries will still need the old 32bit time_t.
Based on background from my
On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 07:13:28PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Adrian Bunk:
>...
> For comparison, the original plan was to provide a macro, perhaps
> -D_TIME_BITS=32 and -D_TIME_BITS=64, to select at build time which ABI
> set is used (“dual ABI”).
To me this would sound like more trouble
* Adrian Bunk:
> On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 07:13:28PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> * Adrian Bunk:
>>...
>> For comparison, the original plan was to provide a macro, perhaps
>> -D_TIME_BITS=32 and -D_TIME_BITS=64, to select at build time which ABI
>> set is used (“dual ABI”).
>
> To me this would
On 2019-07-19 23:19, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> Support for the Intel Quark was dropped when the i386 baseline was
> raised from 586 to 686 in stretch, so that's already irrelevant for
> the Debian i386 port.
Intel Quark has never been supported by Debian due to errata #71538,
which requires to omit
On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 11:19:23PM +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 07:13:28PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > Similar to the LFS support, with the
> > additional property that binaries built in either mode should continue
> > to work on kernels which predate support for the
9 matches
Mail list logo
